Evolution is a more viable theory regarding our status (Existence) than Creationism

Rebuttals1) "The second Law of Thermodynamics makes evolution impossible. The second law of thermodynamics states that states that energy and matter tends to go from order to chaos. Thus how could it be possible for life to exist if energy and matter go from order to disorder? Life requires order to flourish and evolution shows that life goes from simple to more and more complex."I have already replied to this; Indeed. According to the 2nd law of thermodynamics[1], everything tends toward disorder. However, say, there's a barrel between balls. I have a wooden plank. Having established the fact that wood is vulnerable to fire, I ignite it. I throw it to the barrel. The barrel explodes. The balls are no longer where they were. However, I can grab them and return them to their previous locations. In other words, the matter fused into DNA because of an external cause."Would you not agree that the human anatomy and philology is a very well ordered and complex system?"Yep; The digestive system is organized; When food is digested, it goes through the esophagus. During THAT particular process, the liver produces bile (Fluid that helps decompose fats and get rid of wastes in the body) and drops it at the food (Which was originally stored in the Gallbladder). It then is stored in the stomach. There's acid there which has an assigned job for the body to receive protein (Torning food). After receiving them, the water and sodium from stool is absorbed by the large intestine. The small intestine, on the other hand, is the organ where most digestion occurs. Both paths lead to the anus. Without complexion, our bodies probably wouldn't have functioned properly; Disorganization. However, it's like that mere chance of throwing a ring, having it drop ON a pole."So saying that we evolved from a simple single cell and evolved into an incredibly complex and well ordered organism violates this law. You replied once “Seeing as evolution involves science (Physical science)(We originated from single-cellular organisms, overtime evolving, along with our genes), if it's proven to violate even a single scientific law, it is then, falsified.” In response let me ask you which is falsified thermodynamics or evolution." Neither; You didn't really address this. Like said, seeing as evolution involves science (Physical science)(We originated from single-cellular organisms, overtime evolving, along with our genes), if it's proven to violate even a single scientific law, it is then, falsified. However, the 2nd law of thermodynamics isn't defied by evolution (Debunking your argument)."Latter on you use the analogy of a barrel full of balls that explode and balls go everywhere, and you go on to talk about how you can go back and re organize the balls to how you want them. This helps my argument. This explains how life could come about against the laws of thermodynamics. You are saying that someone somehow put those balls in to the specific order that is needed. Please tell me how this is evolution and not creationism."Like said, we can debate this on another topic. Why instead? This is a debate about whether or not evolution is a more viable theory than creationism REGARDING HOW WE CAME TO BE; Read ALL my responses.2) "Life appeared spontaneously. If you look at the fossil record complex life forms appear spontaneously where as the theory of evolutions suggests there were gradual changes to lead up to this complex life. Bacteria can leave fossils, plants can leave fossils, where are the fossils showing single cells leading up to complex plants and animals[1][2][3]?"Like said, fossil records of 1 amongst many varieties of species are exceedingly rare, and only occur under specific conditions, and that the earliest multi-cellular life forms were all soft-bodied (And invertebrates) and thus left little to no trace as fossils for us to observe due to not having a bone that doesn't rot[2], unlike the body. Yes. There, indeed, are plenty of fossils of plants. But, you know why? Because, there were no decomposers there yet. Unless it contains something, overtime, it can rot; Deteriorate, from the lack of resources for survival. Actually read all my responses, like said.3) "All current plants and animals have not evolved since creation, outside of extinctions, and genetic variation in originally created species of plants and animals has only occurred within narrow limits."Like said, "Observation" argument debunks this. Also, like said, we RARELY can encounter mutations (If evolution is a true theory).4) "Mutations and Natural selection would not be enough to divide species into completely different Kingdoms of animals."Yes, it is! If mutations occur more than once, then there are different kinds of species (Although one may already be removed), divided into different kingdoms of species!"Not to mention genetic mutations are extremely rare, estimates show that the rate of mutations that occur are at about 2.5x10^-8 mutations per nucleotide[6]. "No rate of mutation published by human is accurate, seeing as, like said, they are RARELY encountered. Not only that, but they don't occur in a certain pattern.6) (Before actual rebuttal, I'd like to remind you that you skipped number 5)"Single cells reproduce asexually, which means they make clones of themselves in order to reproduce[8]. This means that each cell is an exact coppy of the parent cell. How could life have evolved from a single cell if asexual reproduction produce an exact copy[9]?"Alright. Animals produce a specie (One amongst their kind) asexually. However, they EVOLVE to the next stage not by sex. However, I wonder why those 2 defy each other. Please elaborate.Observation"You stated “scientists have actually observed (And some recorded and said documentaries were published) animals evolving into human (Thus that human originating as said animal).” Where? I have not heard of one animal that was observed to evolve into a human. This is a false fact unless you can provide information for it. Many scientist have hypothesized that man has evolved from apes but it has not been observed."Like said, the lack of evidence for one side (In cases like this) DOESN'T IMPLY THE TRUTH OF THE OPPOSITION! I can't show the documentary of a scientists discovering and recording evolution of an ape. That's why you can drop this argument WITHOUT AFFECTION OF VOTES!Fossil Record, Relation between humans and related living organisms, and Noah's arkI HAVE ALREADY REPLIED TO THESE! Revert to the previous arguments!I await my opponent's next set of arguments.