Teaching Creationism (Theory of a Young Earth) Should Be Prohibited in Public & Private Schools

Hello, and thank you for the response! Microevolution is essentially evolution at a small scale, which can be witnessed and proven; it is testable, reproducible, and falsifiable in a laboratory setting.[1] In short it, is clearly scientific. Macroevolution is generally considered evolution above the species level and has never been witnessed or proven in the laboratory, the drastic changes between categories/genera/families of animals necessary to prove a common ancestor.[2] Ultimately many cases of alleged evolution proofs show only microevolution, e.g. Darwin's finches adapting[3], bacterial adaptation, moth coloration because of tree type[4], etc.Concerning your second point, while much is considered theory, there are some principles nonetheless considered laws to the universe. I argue the theory of evolution is indeed very shaky, and the evidence involved actually indicates Creationism is the correct theory, rather than Macroevolution and a common ancestor. Since we can't test Macroevolution and prove it in a laboratory setting, that's strong evidence that unlike Microevolution it is not empirically true. Furthermore, the fossil record shows evidence for Microevolution and thus Creationism, not Macroevolution. Evolutionists have sought to "move the goalposts" by suggesting evolution conveniently sped up when creating transitions to explain why the numerous transitions Darwin expected the fossil record to present don't exist. However the evidence more logically shows Creationism is true, that gradual Microevolution occurred, God created new species, and there were no intermediate forms indicating a common ancestor. Recent discoveries over the past decade likewise are evidence Creationism is true and Evolution is false, showing mankind was complex to begin with as though created that way by God. Rather than showing primitive early features, there's bipedalism and modern faces in the oldest hominids, and previously alleged transitions have been discovered to coexist in many cases so they couldn't have evolved from one another. I argue this shows evidence mankind simply transitioned from the 900+ year ages prior to the Flood (Genesis 5) to the current maximum 120 year lifespan of today (Genesis 6:3). Concerning how the debate should be judged Pro is correct that he didn't bring up evolution. However to prove his premises in arguing that Creationism should not be taught in schools he should be able to show Creationism is empirically false which I argue he hasn't done. I argue I've shown evidence the reverse is true, that Creationism shows signs of better fitting current evidence than the theory of Evolution. I never conceded the first premise, all my arguments have shown Creationism better fits the existing evidence than Evolution. Therefore, Pro has not proven his premise that Creationism is indoctrination which should not be taught in schools, while I have shown Creationism is reasonable given the problems confronting the theory of Evolution.In making a last closing argument for why Creationism is reasonable, I argue that the further back one looks in the fossil record, the more evident it becomes that ancient species were categorized similar to today's species, only larger.[5] Logically if we all came from a common ancestor there should be a chaotic transition with no clear groupings. There should not be ancient sharks (Megalodon), giant camels (Titanolypus), and ancient Pangolins (Smutsia gigantes) if a common ancestor is true. Species should not be clearly grouped in the fossil record similar to today's species unless created by God.Sources:[1] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[2] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[3] http://www.pbs.org... [4] http://www.bbc.co.uk...[5] http://dinosaurs.about.com...;