Is trying to make people believe in abiogenesis like trying to make little kids believe in Santa Claus?

People will believe in whatever they want to be true. No coaxing necessary.

Non sequiter. Abiogenesis is a TESTABLE theory, and evidence continues to mount that chemical abiogenesis did indeed occur on earth about 4 billion years ago. There's no "belief" needed. The evidence and the theory must either agree, and if they don't, then a better theory must account for the evidence.

Santa Clause is not a theory. And most kids have little trouble getting over such "reality" and can stop believing in the fable after a few years of life.

Is a power greater than chance involved in the universe’s origin? Scientist Arthur H. Compton said of the parts of the tiny atom: “If the simple yet prolific set of pushes and pulls to which the electrons are subject result from pure chance, then chance is more ingenious than the most clever of our scientists.”

Not only do the origin of matter and the order in the universe present problems for those who deny the existence of a Creator, but there is the far greater problem of the origin of life itself. There was a time when spontaneous generation (called abiogenesis, meaning origin from nonlife) was believed to produce life. Worms developed out of putrid flesh, lice from dirt, frogs from the mud of pools, etc. But Pasteur’s experiments of nearly a hundred years demolished that theory. If it is argued that abiogenesis does not occur now but did occur in bygone ages, that is merely speculation. It is not a scientific argument, since it would not be based upon observation and experiment, but rather upon blind assertions that can neither be observed nor proved. Dr. J. Gray, a leading experimental zoologist, explained: “The spontaneous origin of living from inanimate matter must be regarded as a highly improbable event, and as such can be assumed not to have occurred.”

The question is simple: Did matter, order, the marvelous universe and the unexplainable miracle of life occur purely through the outworkings of chance, or were they produced through the design of a great Creator? The former is so implausible that it takes more faith to believe in the materialistic theory of evolution than it does to believe in God! It remains true that “the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.”—Ps. 19:1; Job 9:8; Isa. 40:26; Jer. 10:12., you can prove God exist by looking the world around you and the complexcity of it, but santa?, they can poke all sorts of holes in that theory.

It's probably as difficult if you live in a closed minded community, where everyone thinks that evolution and abiogenesis are the same thing.

Of course Santa Claus is a heathen god, a symbol of Mammon's dominion over the church.

Isn't free-thought lovely?

We actually know the chemistry behind abiogenesis

Well so far its still a theory being tested and it almost works. They are still working the bugs out of it.

No. Comparing a scientific concept with a fairy tale character is ridiculous.