Well done. The measure of a good question on this topic is how interesting your answers are even if they are misguided and you've brought out some real doozies.
As you can see, you won't get any straight answers from evolutionists. I have found through the years that they are totally unable to comprehend the creationist position. They simply repeat straw man variations of the creationist arguments that they find on evolutionary propaganda sites and to be blunt are completely ignorant of scientific creation theory. And they don't even want or care to know the truth. I don't say this to be offensive or controversial, I am simply stating facts. I can guarantee you that not a single one of your evolutionary respondents could even tell you what scientific creation theory is, and yet they spend their days denigrating it!
On the other hand, nearly all creationists have started out as evolutionists and are generally extremely familiar with evolutionary theory. This is particularly true since they are indoctrinated with evolution from an early age and in grade school, high school and then college. It is a testament to their critical thinking skills that creationists have been able to see past the empty arguments to realize that evolution is in reality, just another religious belief. You have rightly pointed out that evolution is based on atheism.
Therefore, we already know all the evolutionist arguments and so there is no point in repeating them. Perhaps I can bring out some of the creationist point of view by responding to some of your other answers.
Since KTDykes doesn't know what an "evolutionist" is, he ought to look in the DICTIONARY where both "evolutionism" and "evolutionist" appear! However, evolutionist do not like these forms of the word, since they have traditionally reserved "ism" and "ist" to denigrate creationists. Looks like they'll have to find another way.
In addition, there is no accounting for people's beliefs. There are probably as many beliefs as there are people. Yes, many people do indeed have a faith-based belief in evolution and also accept the evidence indicating that God exists. That does NOT mean those beliefs are compatible.
This is also the case with atheism and evolution. There is nothing stopping one from believing in evolution and also belonging to a religion (ie catholic). However, they cannot accept a Biblical God and believe in evolution without contradiction. Anyone who argues for evolution ALSO argues for atheism, whether they realize it or not. You need only look at surveys of scientists to understand this. Surveys show that a whopping 87% of leading evolutionists deny the existence of God. In addition, 94% of the National Academy of Science and 60% of college biologists consider themselves atheist or agnostic. I have yet to find an evolutionist that will even attempt to explain those numbers if evolution has nothing to do with atheism. The fact of the matter is that evolution does NOT require God. It is based on the false assumption that everything we see came about by purely natural means and any supernatural causes are rejected a priori. You cannot presuppose a rejection of supernatural causes and then say you are not arguing from an atheistic viewpoint!
Here is an example of how evolutionists do not understand creation theory. KTDykes says that "evolutionary theory happens to be an explanation accounting for the diversity of lifeforms on the planet". However so is creation theory! If he can't figure that out...
David C is a science teacher and demonstrates what I've been talking about. First he is an atheist, which confirms that this is typical of those who promote evolutionary concepts. I'm going to dissect his argument, but not to be critical of him. I merely wish to demonstrate how evolutionists live in a completely different world than creationists.
He doesn't realize that evolution is simply a collection of stories meant to explain things that we don't understand. Evolution is about historical events that can NEVER be observed nor repeated. We can only speculate about them by interpreting evidence based on ASSUMPTIONS. If we use the incorrect assumptions (like everything came about by purely natural means), we are going to get incorrect answers! The Bible on the other hand is NOT a collection of stories by ancient "tribes" that didn't know better. It is demonstrably the Word of God and is an accurate eye-witness testimony of what actually happened (the only way to know for sure).
He insists that creationists are suggesting that "science is wrong". However, this could not be further from the truth. Creationists are suggesting that SCIENCE IS RIGHT! Creationists believe that the vast preponderance of scientific evidence supports the creation model. Whether one beliefs in evolution or accepts the creationist explanation depends entirely on what assumptions they use to interpret the facts and evidence.
He also says that "I would have thought the beautiful simplicity of the Natural selection system created by random exchange of genetic material to be one of the strongest arguments to support a divine being". My answer is YES IT IS!!! This is what I mean by evolutionists not understanding creation theory. The "natural selection system" is an essential component of creation theory which states that all the diversity of life we see today arose from a set of original kinds. However, scientific evidence demonstrates conclusively that this variation remains within these kinds as we have NEVER observed one kind changing into a fundamentally different kind whether in the fossil record or from scientific observations in the present. To suggest we all magically arose from a common ancestor is a mockery of science since it stands against several scientific laws, is contrary to all of our scientific observations and common sense itself.
I am also worried about "pseudo science" (like evolutionism) posing itself as real science to the exclusion of all other scientific alternatives in our schools.
I was thinking about this further and thought I could provide further clarification to one of my points. Let's suppose for a moment that the TRUTH is that God created the initial kinds of life and that they did not evolve from some primordial slime (or in some volcanic sea geyser). Evolutionists must and will reject this notion because they consider it outside the bounds of science. Only NATURAL explanations are allowed. Therefore God's creative act MUST be rejected even though it may have been what actually happened! Therefore the truth can never be known with evolutionist's false "definition" of science.
Yet, science is supposed to be a search for truth. That is, a search for what the true explanation for physical phenomena are. There is NOTHING about science or the definition of science which rules out supernatural causes. The remnants (or results) of supernatural causes can be scientifically investigated just as validly as the big bang or abiogenesis, neither of which has or can be observed or repeated. For example, just because we have not witnessed the worldwide catastrophic flood, does not mean the resulting physical evidence cannot be scientifically examined. And if that evidence is consistent with the flood theory, then we can be more assured that the eye-witness account of that event is accurate. In fact, we do not have to invoke any supernatural causes to accept that a world wide flood occurred and has been validated scientifically.
In the same spirit, we have not witnessed the creation event, but neither have we witnessed the big bang or abiogenesis. Yet, the fact that living things demonstrate the characteristics of design is being scientifically investigated by Intelligent Design scientists. In addition, we see that living things only vary within "kinds" just as one would predict if these kinds were designed and created in the first place. Therefore science continues to support the creation model and eye-witness accounts of our history even though it involves an initial supernatural cause. This is really no different than a big bang "cause" which many evolutionists consider "supernatural" from the standpoint that God invoked it.