Evolution exists!

Because there is no given rubric for debate, I will assume that primary BOP is on Pro, given the wording of the topic. Therefore, I only need to disprove Pro's evidence to effectively participate. Before anything else, some definitions. Micro evolution: Minor evolutionary change as observed over a period of time. Macro evolution: Major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another at the level of species. My opponent uses DNA as his opening argument. This is probably one of the most flawed among all arguments for evolution. For example, my opponent states that we share 96% of our DNA with chimps. (No sources for any of these stats.) But this really has nothing to do with whether or not we evolved from apes. The reason we share so much of our DNA, is that both species need to carry out the basic functions of life. Any animal needs to breath, digest food, reproduce, and heal its injuries. Thus, most animals share a great deal of DNA in order to carry out these tasks, but that should't mean that they are almost the same animal. In fact, humans share as much as 50% of our DNA with bananas. [1] Surely my opponent doesn't suggest that we evolved from plants. Evolution itself as a theory is extremely flawed. Contention #1: Evolution provides no beginning Most evolutionists seem to believe that all the necessary building blocks for evolution were formed by an instantaneous combustion of energy and particles. According to the laws of conservation of mass and energy [2], this is completely impossible. Energy and particles cannot simply poof into existence in a "big bang". So, where did these particles and energy come from? No evolutionist that I know has been able to answer that. I invite my opponent to come up with a suitable answer for evolution's flawed beginning. Contention #2: Evolution violates the law of entropy According to macro evolution, a series of mutations over millions of years took place, and the individual with a good mutation survived better that the others, thus passing its mutation on to its children, resulting in a better species. Mutation is often natural, but it is chance in the sense that you don't know what will change about a species [3]. According to the law of entropy, a chance-type event will cause greater levels of organization to descend into chaos [4]. It is impossible for something less organized, such as a single celled organism or insect, to turn into something more organized like a primate or human by chance. Contention #3: Evolution relies on too many constants Professionals who "calculate" evolution rely on current rates of nature to have been constant since the beginning of time. Carbon dating requires that carbon's radioactive decay took place at a constant rate throughout earth's life, space plotters rely on gravity, centrifugal and centripetal forces, light, time, and decay remaining constant for "millions" of years. We have NO reason to believe that these key rates have been constant throughout earth's history. Now I turn it over to my opponent, not only to answer to my contentions, but to provide indisputable proof that evolution is how our earth and the species on it came to be. Sources: [1] http://www.mirror.co.uk... [2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com... [3] http://dictionary.reference.com... [4] http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...