You can't claim to understand Darwinism while still taking it to task for any imagined failure to address the very beginning of life. You've said both that evolution is and is not observable and falsifiable. Maybe you need to start over and clearly define what you wish to discuss and what your objections are. While you're doing that, you'll also need to define the version of Creationism that you support, since the most commonly proselytized ones disagree with what you have said. None of these are questions about evolution.
Darwinian theory IS in dispute.
Darwin knew nothing about RNA or prokaryotes. Darwin himself even stated that he did not have all of the answers and understood that his theories may be expanded, improved or even overturned by later study. That's equivalent to brushing aside Newton because his theory of gravity doesn't hold up under relativistic conditions that he had no way of knowing. These have all been attempted to be explained by Darwinianists who understand the need for the consistency of scientific theory. That is much preferred to inventing Creationist-style fairy tales as explanations.