Once again you can't even keep your sciences straight.
Cosmology, geology, abiogenesis and biology are all separate fields of study.
Attempting to apply biology to cosmology doesn't work.
Again you are obfuscating. You still want to start with nothing and end up with people. All that you mentioned are different branches of the same thing: Science. In order to have the credibility to talk about Natural Selection you first need to show how Natural got here, including natural laws. Like that one evolutionist Ph.D astronomer said jokingly, "You can only appeal to the tooth fairy so many times," when referring to the problems with evolution whether talking about the evolution of stars or people.
Again, you fail at every level.
None of this has anything to do with what I want, but what is indicated by the evidence. As for your assertion that one can only be credible on a subject if they know all the precursors, that's just non-sense.
If my son drops a glass on the floor covering it with shards, having witnessed the event, I know how the shards got there. It doesn't matter that I didn't buy the glass, or know what factory it came from, or that I don't know the ration of silica to sodium carbonate in the glass. I can answer no to all those questions, and still be knowledgeable about how the glass ended up on the floor.
If you really care about how evolution really operates, let me suggest an excellent source written by a Catholic with his PHD in Biology and current professor at Brown:
