Ha. And creation has soo much evidence compared to evolution (that was sarcastic).

It actually does. The principal of uniformity, which nearly all forensic investigation is based on, basically states that things in the past must be assumed to follow the same basic logic of things in the present. If in the present, information and specified functions are always demonstrated to be the results of intelligent design, then it is most logical to assume that life, which contains information encoded in DNA, and has intricate systems with specified functions, also is a result of intelligent design. I freely admit that this does not *necessarily* prove creation in its entirety; however, it does show that evolutionary theory is as non-nonsensical as saying that a supercomputer was built by bombs exploding in a junk yard. While it may be *possible* with enough luck (and that is the understatement of the century), forensics is not concerned with merely the possible, but with the likely and the reasonable.

That's abiogenesis, not evolution, genius.

naturalistic evolution depends on abiogenesis. Without abiogenesis one must resort to theistic evolution, at which point one might as well believe in direct creation (unless evolution can be clearly observed, in which case theistic evolution could be true. This has yet to happen, however.).

Even assuming abiogenesis did occur, evolution still lacks any sort of mechanism or cause to direct it. Many claim evolution is a result of natural selection, but natural selection always takes information out of the equation. Mutations can allow for offspring to have a higher gene count than its parents, but mutations are almost always harmful.

Critically examined, there is no reason to even call evolution a hypothesis. It is dogma, and has not a single leg to stand upon, except as a method of holding to atheism against all evidence and logic.

Now, I am quite certain that you are still not convinced. Why should you be? I am just a random person on the internet, after all. What I hope to have accomplished is to perhaps encourage any Christian who is under intellectual pressure. I hope to have demonstrated that the idea of intelligent design is entirely reasonable and rational. I also hope for the off-chance that someone who is sincerely searching for truth will happen to read this and at least think about it.

If you still want to continue debating, that is perfectly acceptable, but please know that I have certain expectations for debates, standards that I intend to hold myself to, and hope others will do the same. I expect mutual respect, regardless of agreement or disagreement. I will listen to you. I will treat you like a human being. I may say that your beliefs are false, but I will not insult you directly. I will risk the sensation of being right for the joy of finding truth. If you can solidly and soundly prove evolution is true, then I will admit defeat. My only hope is that a debate leads to truth, and that anyone involved may be edified through it.