It’s not a hypothesis, it’s a theory. Please don’t throw big words around without a good understanding of what they mean. 1. Theory, hypothesis are used in non-technical contexts to mean an untested idea or opinion. A theory in technical use is a more or less verified or established explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena: the theory of relativity.
A hypothesis is a conjecture put forth as a possible explanation of phenomena or relations, which serves as a basis of argument or experimentation to reach the truth: This idea is only a hypothesis.
What are you referring to as “inorganic” elements? If you’re talking about creating life out of rocks, of course no one did, no one was trying… If you’re talking from a chemistry point of view (organic as in composed of carbon chains as oposed to inorganic), it also hasn’t been tried, because no one is expecting carbon chains to become aminoacids and then life.
Now, if by “inorganic” you mean compunds that weren’t part of a life form, then yes, it has been done. And while I could point out Stanly Miller’s experiment, many would argue that while he did create aminoacids, he never created actual life. Well, scientists have also created a virus out of no form of life. USATODAY.com - Scientists create a virus that reproduces
People tend to get caught up in their own present notions when thinking about evolution. Such as whey they think that the common ancestor between two species should “look” like a cross bred between those species. That’s far from what happens. It pretty much depends on how far back you’re trying to go.
In your badly picked example of fish and reptile, I’d like to point out that after fish came amphibians, and after those the reptile showed up. I’m sure anyone can see how an amphibian is about half way between a fish and a reptile. Yet a fish, a frog, and a snake don’t look much alike. But if you wanna discuss the Lemur-Gorilla-Chimp (and human!) common ancestor, then you can’t think of it as a cross between those animals, because that’s not what it is.
The same way humans didn’t no evolve from apes. Humans evolved from the same ancestor as apes. That’s why we still have some genetic residue from that ancestor, like out tail bones and appendices. It may be hard to think that a dolphin would share a common ancestor with all other mammals, but likewise, dolphins have residual “arms and fingers” in their fins.
Not to mention, if you look at an early stage embryo of ANY mammal, after limbs, head and eyes have started to form, you might have a very hard time figuring out what animal you’re looking at: they all look almost the same.
