So if you have an alternative theory, fine, provide some evidence. Do you understand what evidence means? It means things which can be tested, compared by multiple investigators, and the results of that testing b=can be used to make viable, accurate predictions. We need to be able to say that 'If this theory is true, then we should see xxxx" More importantly, we need to be able to say "If the theory is FALSE, we would see this" By using those two reciprocal tests, we can begin to decide if the theory has any validity. In the case of the theory of evolution though natural selection, the evidence is overwhelming. We have tens of thousands of individual pieces of evidence, from the fossil record to DNA sequencing.
As for creationism, it has zero evidence. On the contrary, most of the tenets of the idea (it is is barely a hypothesis, let alone a theory) are completely overturned by the simplest scientific examination. All creationism has going for it is its appearance in a book, without any backup of other sources of evidence.
-
Evolution happened .. and continues to happen. It's a completely undeniable fact .. even 'the church' accepts that. The evidence is everywhere and you seem to have completely missed the point that as 'evolution' doesn't explain completely how it all started a so called ''creator of the universe'' and evolution could go together.
-
Well, the evidence supports evolution. If you can find evidence that supports another theory better, or if you can come up with another theory that fits the current evidence better than evolution you'd be famous (at least within the scientific community)...
OK. You believe in creationism. Write a paper on creationism, get it peer reviewed and then you're good to go...