While Evolutionists frequently claim their religion is essential to science, there are numerous examples of when it actually hindered science. A brilliant example of this is the discovery of Synergistes jonesii, a gut bacteria that enabled Hawaiian goats to eat leucaena, an otherwise toxic shrubby tree.
The Evolutionary narrative was that the goats had evolved to be able to eat the shrub, but Dr Raymond Jones, after whom synergistes jonesii was named, didn't buy the explanation. He proposed that the rumen of these particular goats contained special bacteria. He faced heavy opposition for this hypothesis, and was denied the funding to test it. However, he funded his own research, and lo and behold, he was vindicated. The result was an agricultural revolution in Australia.
This highly simplified version of a brilliant success story proves three things:
1. Creationists do make scientific predictions, and they are very often correct. This is contrary to what many Evolutionist apologists repeat like a banging drum.
2. The Evolutionary narrative is not always (in fact, I dare say never) the best. The Evolutionary narrative in this case was proven wrong, whereas the Creationist assumption was proven correct.
3. Sometimes, Evolution hinders science. Had Jones not been able to self fund his research, synergistes jonesii would still be a hypothetical concept in his own mind, and Australia would still be awaiting its discovery.
So, is Evolution really the backbone of biology? Not even close. It certainly has its place in a comedy book, but when it's inserted dogmatically into academia, serious studies are hindered, scientific advancements are postponed, and life ceases to improve. I think I'd rather take God at His word than submit to such fanciful tales.