Evolution is based on scientific facts, while Creationism is a common pseudoscience

I don't care what any catholic or any other denomination "priest" says. Evolution directly contradicts the six day creation of the Scriptures. Carbon dating does NOT work. Carbon dating is done by measuring the remaining C14 in a decaying fossil in which the animal possessed that ate plants that absorb C14 from the atmosphere. This C14 is very radioactive and decays quickly. Half of it decays every 5,750 years. You can measure rate of decay and how much is left, but without knowing exactly how much it had in the first place you can not know how long it has been decaying. This being said, I'll give a couple of examples of carbon dating failures: In 1949, the lower leg of a mammoth was carbon dated 15,380 RCY (radio carbon years) while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY. In 1963, living mollusk's shells carbon dated as being 2,300 years old. 1971, a freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1,300 years ago. Shells from living snails were carbon dated 27,000 years old in 1984. Just a couple of examples. It is proven many times not to work. You say that fossil records clearly show the change of past species. what records? give an example. Evolutionists always do this. give me an example or don't say it. On to bacteria. has anybody ever seen bacteria evolve into non bacteria? Although I object to the term, I believe in micro evolution within a kind. I know that this is proven in the lab. But one kind never changes into another kind in the lab. The moment you go from evolution within a kind to evolution from kind to kind you leave science and enter lala land. Give me an example of one mutation that has been proven beneficial and positive. All we have is negative, including bacteria. Although some bacteria may become immune to a chemical, this is not caused by positive, but negative mutation. The bacteria become immune when they lose the part that the chemical would latch on to. Although the bacteria is spared of the chemical due to the missing part, it is still inferior to the other bacteria that still have the part. It's not gaining, It's losing. It's like if the cops showed up to a party and began handcuffing people, but there is one there with no hands. The one with no hands will not get cuffed, but he is still inferior to the other people as he is missing something beneficial that the others have. There is no way for genetic information to increase as it moves down the gene pool. My turn to make an argument: Since the "big bang" pairs with "evolution" as the beginning of evolution, I will Start with that. Understand that when a spinning object breaks apart in a friction-less environment, all the particles will spin in the same direction. This is called the conservation of angular momentum. If the big bang theory is true, explain to me why Venus, Uranus, and possibly Pluto spin backwards? Also, 6 of the 63 moons spin backwards. Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune have moons orbiting in both directions. Why? The theory says that compact energy caused the spec to explode... Where did the energy and the spec come from? Making matter smaller does not get rid of the "how did it come to be?" problem. The rock layers shatter the evolution theory easy. The sediment layers could not have taken millions of years to form. Standing petrified trees are found all over within these rock layers, connecting them all. When a tree dies it falls around here. How long does a dead tree stand where you live? The rock layers show that all the sediment formed within the standing lifetime of all these trees. It is easily scientifically proven that all these layers would easily form under the conditions of a world wide flood in about 20 minutes. this is done just by placing the different sediment in a container of water and watching them sort themselves automatically. So if there was a big flood, it would make sense that the trees are still standing because the sediments would just quickly form around them. Also within these rock layers are found all over fossils of animals petrified frozen in the "scared" position. Animals don't just die in the "scared" position. What were they ALL afraid of when they died?? The flood explains it all. There was found a petrified closed clam shell (clams open when they die) at the top of Mount Everest. How did that get up there, and why did it die closed? It must have died VERY quickly. everything is at constant decay, second law of thermodynamics. this contradicts the "evolution" process. Things are not getting better, they're getting worse. No scientist has been able, with all their technology to create life from non life. Fossil records show no sign of evolution. prove me wrong with example. I have run out of characters. I will post more argument next round