I sincerely apologize if anything I said came across disrespectful or combative… and I certainly apologize if anything I said suggested to impute motives… but yes, I will insist on that on this one point, it is an equivocation, however unintentional. The term “organic molecules” is vague such that no one could deny your statement, but what you actually are trying to argue is far more specific than just “organic molecules.”
No one, objects to the idea that “all manner of organic molecules” can be created through various natural processes. This is not in dispute.
The debate is as to whether those specific highly complex molecules such as highly ordered, functional, homochiral, sequence-specific polypeptides and nucleotides could be created through such a process. Not whether “organic molecules” could be formed.
Discussing the controversial latter concept, while using the vague and uncontroversial language of the former, is unhelpful, and it is what I understand an equivocation to be, however unintentional. unless I misunderstand the concept or the definition of that fallacy, which is certainly possible?