Creationism is the best theory for the origin of life

First off you gave no evidence for string theory or multi verse theory. You just brought up two other theories. Also these are not theories for the origin of life necessarily, they are theories for the origin of the universe. In my opinion they are not good theories whatsoever. Something cannot come from nothing. If you were to say you believe in a mulitverse then you believe our universe came from another universe. But then you would have to say where did that universe come from and then so on and so forth and you have an infinite regress never answering the problem for how the original universe came to be. This is also not a viable theory because it has NO evidence supporting it. We can barely see a spec of our universe in all of its enormity, yet you are postulating already that there are infinte other universes out there? That is absolutely absurd. If that is your best theory then that is very sad indeed. You need evidence for this theory which you have none. You basically just said the theory and gave us no reason to believe in it and then claimed it was superior to creationism. Your multiverse theory seems to be more of an argument from ignorance more than anything else since it cannot be disproven yet has almost no evidence to go off of. As for evolution your evidence for why this is true is stating that there have been a lot of books written about it? If that is your evidence for why it is true then creationism is also true due to the fact that there have been hundreds and thousands of books written about it as well. Not only that but there have been many books written about why evolution is false my favorite being "the case for a creator" by Lee Strobel. You cannot simply just say a theory is true because books have been written about it, you must apply reasoning and logic and evidence into why it is true which you did not do. And by saying evolution is pretty much a fact reveals your ignorance on the subject. If it were pretty much a fact why do you think it is still so controversial? Even by scientists and athiests it is an extremely controversial theory. It is far from a fact. And since your main reason fot believing things is that they have books written about them then your main reason for believing evolution is from a book written in the 19th century. Thank you for truly showing where your "pounds of evidence" come from. Next time actually give some good evidence for evolution. I am not saying that creationism is only true because the other theories do not work so it is the only answer left. I believe in creationism for many reasons.Among these reasons is the fine tuning or various universal constants of the universe. World renown physicist Paul Davies said, "There is now broad agreement among physicists and cosmologists that the Universe is in several respects "fine-tuned' for life." There are so many universal constants that have to lie in such an extremely narrow way and all have to line up to be conducive to life that it is virtually impossible for all of these constants to line up the way they do randomly. This points to grand design by a creator to make all these universal constants the way they are for life to be created. And also to go against evolution and natural selection humans show many behavioral and cognitive traits and abilities that offer no apparent survival advantage (e.g. music, art, religion, ability to ponder the nature of the universe). These traits and the knowledge of goid and evil and morality point towards a creator and a moral law giver. And we know that everything must have a cause, which you cannot possibly refute, so it all comes down to whether you think the univere came from a multiverse leading to an infinite regress or simply sprang into existence from nothing which is ridiculous or you believe in a God. Now since we can reasonably infer that the universe has no mind of its own it can't simply make itself. This leads you to believe that there is a creator behind it. Now you would have to ask if there is a creator who created him? Well if the creator did indeed create everything including the universe and all of its laws and time itself then he doesn't need a beginning. He literally created the beginning, time itself. If the creator is the cause for the universe then you do not need to explain the answer to how the universe began. That is looking for what caused the cause. We do not need to do this. You never need to explain the cause. It just simply is the cause. Now you could say that about anything else that could possibly create the universe as well, even by saying the universe just created itself so it is its own cause. But then you would have to give reason to this and show that the universe has a cause for itself and virtually a mind of its own which it clearly does not, and you would still have the problem of morality. This is why it is much more plausible to believe in a creator who created time and morality than to believe the universe created itself. And since we are beings within the constraints of time we will never be able to understand a being who is not held to the constraints of time but literally created time itself. The structure of DNA itself shows extremely intelligent design that natural selection through evolution can't account for. It is way more plausible to believe that a creator created all of the structure and intelligence we see in the world rather than it simply occurring randomly. And as the great C.S Lewis said, "If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning." So this is why I believe in creationalism and a creator who sets in place a meaning and purpose for our lives and who morality comes from. The other theories simply do not add up or fail to answer all the criticisms of them or they lead to an infinite regress.