I am talking about the specific weaknesses in the argument that you have made.

If you have a poor argument (e.g. "I do not find it compelling") and it happens to be the case that abiogenesis is, in fact, impossible, our coming to know the latter with confidence will not be dependent on the former.

So it's worth assessing the quality of arguments separately from demonstrating the truth or falsity of some non-obvious proposition, because we want arguments that help settle the matter.