I took a look at your book. Just looking at the first few scientists you quote:

According to New York Professor Robert Shapiro, an expert in DNA: “The coincidental formation probability of the 2000 types of proteins found in a single bacterium is 10 to the 1040 power against.”

He is referring to the probability of them all forming simultaneously. That’s not what evolution is about.

Chandra Wickramasinghe, a British professor of mathematics and astronomy: “The likelihood of the spontaneous formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it.

Wickramasinghe was extremely well-regarded in his field. Which, as you say yourself, is not biology or even chemistry. This quote comes from a book (which you do not seem to reference) and that book provides no evidence for his statement.

Bonus:

Although an evolutionist himself, astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle stated: “The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable to the chance of a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard assembling a Boeing 747 from the materials therein. This means that it is not possible for the cell to have come into being by coincidence, and therefore it must definitely have been created.”

Hoyle was co-author with Wickramasinghe of the book you quoted from earlier. Again, this is not what evolutionists claim. For example, read Dawkins on the evolution of the eye (which has happened around forty or more times that we know of). If it was designed, why so many different designs? The eye is often used as an example of irreducible complexity, but Dawkins brilliantly shows why this is not the case.

Your selective quoting from outdated material that itself misses the point or doesn’t say what you think it does is disingenuous at best.