The origin of biology

[Esquilax]

There is currently no evidence-based scientific explanation for the origin of life. There is, however, a few potential speculations (e.g. RNA world theory, clay hypothesis, self-replication, etc).

Since there is no conclusive evidence for its origin, wouldn't the statement that ("life is only a natural phenomenon") be simply a belief?

It's a probabilistic conclusion based on all of the available evidence. We have no evidence at all that suggests that the supernatural is even possible, much less involved in the creation and existence of life, and all of the evidence we do have supports the idea that life is a natural phenomenon, so... what, exactly, is supposed to lead us to conclude that life isn't only a natural phenomenon? Why ignore the evidence in favor of a proposition that we can't even establish as real, merely because a bunch of religiously motivated ideologues would really like it if we did?

How can an atheist claim that their world-view is based on evidence?

... Because it is what the evidence supports?

That's not to say, by the way, that a naturalistic theory of the origins of life is an atheist position, because it's not. Atheism stops at not believing in gods. Natural life is an evidence based position, but there's nothing in atheism that obligates one to accept that position.

Doesn't this, at the very least, makes it simply equally possible for life to be either a natural or a super-natural phenomenon?

No! No, not in the slightest!

Just because a proposition isn't one-hundred percent proven with certainty doesn't mean that every other proposition is equally possible! In fact, in the case of the supernatural, we'd need to demonstrate that such a thing even is possible before we can start determining if it's "equally possible"! Based on the evidence we have right now, a natural explanation might not be at 100%, but a supernatural explanation remains at 0% until such time as someone can establish the existence of the supernatural. A lack of certainty in one thing does not elevate all other assertions to "equally likely" status. Jeez...