Evolution vs Creationism

The reason I brought up the origins of matter was because without matter, there can be no meteorites, prebiotic molecules, or life at all. This obviously presents a challenge for the theory of evolution. So far, only Creation explains the origin of matter and life, while evolution only explains (or attempts to explain) the origin of life, leaving out the obvious question, "where did that material come from". In addition, if it can be proven that the earth is not as old as evolutionists claim, but is nearer the age that young earth creationists estimate, than the theory of evolution and the origin of life will also be debunked. In my last arguments I discussed the age of the earth. My opponent gives next a detailed hypothesis as to how he thinks life arose on the planet. However, I ask him what would happen if the amino acids were mixed up in a pot, or even proteins. Would this mixture be life? Of course not. After any of us die, we remain chemically the same as when we were alive. The only difference between a cadaver and a human being alive and well is consciousness bound to the body. So even if the earth was as old as evolutionists suppose, allowing for evolution to take place, and even if it did somehow manage to create an amino acid: It would still not be alive. An amino acid is "complex", this characteristic being largely in the eye of the beholder. However, a protein is terribly more complicated [1]. For those who don"t know among the voters, a protein is essentially hundreds if not thousands of amino acids liked together [2]. Even still more complicated than a protein is an organism itself, and here I come to my argument. Unless all the parts in a given organism were in place at exactly the same time, in the same original organism, the organism would die, and the whole of the races of life on the planet would go extinct. Let"s use humans, for instance. If the heart was not in place for the first human, all future humans would never live. All of the organs in every creature serve a purpose [3]. For most of these, if that organ was eliminated, the organism would die. So, all of those organs must have been present for the first creature of its type, which is a major leap in evolution, that cannot be made (all important organs in one generation). Even if Kreeft is scientifically inaccurate and fallible, what he says in this case is true. I believe that life was created on earth by God. Many things here were created solely for our enjoyment. After the curse and first sin, however, arose toxic snakes, invasive weeds, etc. I believe that while there are many things of difficulty on the earth, they are outnumbered by the things that clearly evidence design [4]. We can look at these things of design and workmanship and see that someone must have made it. It simply cannot have arisen from nothing, as evolutionists suppose. David Darling said, "What is a big deal"the biggest deal of all"is how you get something out of nothing. Don"t let the cosmologists try to kid you on this one. They have not got a clue either"despite the fact that they are doing a pretty good job of convincing themselves and others that this is really not a problem. "In the beginning," they will say, "there was nothing"no time, space matter or energy. Then there was a quantum fluctuation from which . . ." Whoa! Stop right there. You see what I mean? . . . Then they are away and before you know it, they have pulled a hundred billion galaxies out of their quantum hats." [5] Not only could this be applied to the cosmos, but to organisms on earth as well. In addition, there are many problems with evolution, which I state above. Sources: [1] http://www.washington.edu... [2] http://www.nature.com... [3] https://answersingenesis.org... [4] https://answersingenesis.org... [5] https://answersingenesis.org...