A leading British scientist said yesterday that he had given up trying to persuade creationists that Darwin’s theory is correct after repeatedly being misrepresented and, he said, branded a liar. (source)
Evolutionists would hardly defeat the Creationists even on an educational debate.
Evolutionists’ proofs mostly on “organisms adaptations to its environment” couldn’t proved that the Darwin’s theory of Evolution is true because their conclusions based on their said proofs are just assumptions. What I mean is, when the evolutionists tried to prove that man came from a kind of animal couldn’t be proven by showing how a certain species of fish changed into another species through breeding or adaptation to environment. The best thing evolutionists should do in order to show that Evolution is true and the creationism is false, is not to show the result of experiment on fish, instead they should exhibit documents based on their experiments that certain animal has ended up to a Human being.
It might be true that HIV changes when infecting a man but it still didn’t proved that man came from the family of monkeys. It might be true that a certain species of dogs resulted on breeding the two different dogs, but it didn’t proved that man came from chimps. It might be true that a certain fish changes to its new kind when it tries to adopt its new environment but it still didn’t proved that man is just a result of evolution.
What was written on the Holy Bible is still more believable than the theory of Evolution.