Creationism is an irrational explanation for life on Earth

First off, not trying to be a kiss-up, but you made some very good and intelligent points. Which, no matter what my religion, I will recognize. However, I disagree with some points. You start off by saying that "The Bible is an unreliable source of information and is flawed". I can't understand why you would think that, though. The Bible is the most read book in the world. It beats #2 on the list of most read books in the world by a couple thousands of millions. Are all of those people Christian? I highly doubt that. Anyways, that topic is for another debate, we're here to talk about the rationality of Creationism. Let's examine what you've said here, as you make an attempt to confirm evolution. Evolution is a theory. It isn't a scientific law. Scientific laws are 100% true. What you're trying to explain here is a theory. Have you proved that theory? No, simply because it hasn't been done yet, and it never will. Why? It's a gold mine of errors. Thus, explaining why it's still just a theory. Yes, new kinds and variations of a certain species are possible, but this isn't, and has never been done by science. What you don't, and refuse to admit, is this very fact; no species has ever been proved to evolve in any way. You base most of your first points off of a thing called "natural selection". This idea has been proved false before, also. Say that natural selection were true, and thus, a reality. What would happen? Humans would adapt to their setting on a physical level. Those who live in the north, in the cold, would develop fur to keep warm. If this were true, humans in the south, the tropic areas, would have reflective skin to keep them cool, or something along those lines. Natural selection just isn't true. Now, on to your second points on Abiogenesis. For those who don't know, Abiogenesis is, by definition, the natural process of life coming from non-living matter, under proper conditions, of course. I'm not quite sure why you brought this up, as scientists of molecular biology have began to conclude that this is less and less probable, and is outside the realm of probability. I won't discuss much of it here, or my own head would start hurting. If I could see what you have to say on this topic, that would be splendid. Now, finally, onto my side of the story. Creationism. You say that there is zero evidence in favor of creationism. I disagree, and I disagree with a generic answer that, quite frankly, hasn't been disproven yet. Look around you, there is evidence of creationism all around. You don't even need to leave your seat to see that our entire universe is in perfect design. We, planet Earth, sit in a position perfect from the Sun. A fraction closer or further away, life would not be possible. Our solar system is a perfect design of flawless living conditions. And, by definition, a design must have been created by a designer. Could all of this you see before you come from chaos? Perfection doesn't come from chaos, and never will. "To suppose that the eye... could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." - Charles Darwin (1872) I'm quite excited to see your input. If you can prove that a flawless universe can come from chaos, major kudos to you.