Could RNA start life?

I don't know that. I suspect it is false. The majority are probably those who admit that there is something unknown, yet to be explained.As far as I know, there are several schools of thought about the origin of life. The two main ones seem to be "RNA first" and "metabolism first".Personally, I am not committed to either, but I think "metabolism first" the more likely of the two.

You are reading too much into what I said.Metabolism is a matter of chemical reactions releasing potential energy of chemical structure, and making that available as kinetic energy (producing motions). Spontaneously occurring chemical reactions do some of that.

Perhaps you missed the "I am not committed to either" part of Message 5. I am not making any claim that all of the problems have been solved. Well, okay. If you are committed to life magically popping into existence, then we will have to agree to disagree.I take the view that life was preceded by some earlier systems which had some but not all of what we would today consider life. That allows a possible path for life to evolve out of spontaneously occurring chemistry. If you are going to insist that terms such as "metabolism" are not to be used outside of what we today consider to be life, then you are a priori excluding such a possibility of predecessors.