Creation Makes Better Science
While the origins debate is basically a religious debate, many people have been taught that evolution is science and creation is religion. But even according to the evolutionist's own rules of science, evolution is not good science. Let's look at the claims of evolution in light of what science knows today.
Life has never been seen to develop from nonliving materials. Yet, evolution says it did. Mutations, said by evolutionists to have created all the kinds of living things, have never been seen to produce one creature that was more complex or better able to survive. Then again, the moon has moonquakes, a magnetic field and internal heat – all indications that it is far younger than evolutionists believe. The Cretaceous limestone was produced from sediment in water and extends in one continuous band from Northern Ireland through Europe and Asia to Australia. This suggests that the entire area was beneath the sea all at the same time, yet evolution refuses to accept Noah's Flood as a global and historical event.
If language evolved, why are the most ancient languages the most complex? If religion evolved, why do the most ancient forms of religion worship one God, a Creator, while later forms of the same religions have many gods – who are much more like human beings?
I could list many more examples showing that only the Bible's account of history makes sense in light of what we know today.