While science intends to observe the natural world as it is now, Evolution purports to explain events that happened "so many millions of years ago", in the "whenever period", or during the "whatever age" etc. This is all stuff that cannot be observed in the present, because it (supposedly) happened in the past.
This is significant. The reason Evolution has such a stronghold on the culture is because it has been aggressively marketed as an indisputable fact of science. But as you can see, it is actually a claim about the unobserved past, and it is absolutely not beyond dispute. Nobody has ever seen any kind of Evolution, except of course the things we all have in common. Do species change over time? Yes, Creationists were writing about that before Darwin's time. But no one has ever observed the kind of change that could change, for example, a dinosaur into a bird.
That's the biggest advantage Christianity has over Evolution. While Evolution is just a made up story about things nobody ever saw, or could see again, the Bible is an accurate historical record, not only written by eyewitnesses to the events it describes, and backed by evidence from various academic fields, but inspired by the perfect, Holy and inerrant God. He not only also witnessed the events described, but personally orchestrated them.
Both Evolution and the Bible put forward a historical narrative, and both have the same facts available. While Evolutionists chant silly slogans like "we have the fossils, we win", they neglect to inform you that Creationists are well aware of, and perfectly capable of accounting for, fossils. The Bible nowhere indicates that fossils can't exist. By contrast, Evolution does preclude things like short period comets, C-14 in diamonds and dinosaur fossils, soft tissue in dinosaur fossils, and a long list of other things which, by all rights, should refute Evolution. However, although these things do exist, and fit the Biblical history better than the Evolutionary narrative, Evolutionists are able to cram these things into their story. To explain the existence of short period comments, for example, they invented oort clouds. They explain soft tissue in dinosaur bones by claiming iron somehow preserved it for 65 million years. I'm not sure how they explain C-14 in dinosaur bones, since I've only ever seen them try to hide that fact, but Evolution is too sacred to yield to evidence, so they'll eventually try to explain it somehow.
Nevertheless, it's clear that the battle isn't faith vs. science, but faith vs. faith, science vs. science, and history vs. history. Philosophically, both sides are equal. Objectively, however, Evolution is the weaker history. It is based purely on imagination. Imagination created the "theory", imagination sustains the "theory", and only when people stop relying on imagination over real, documented history will it finally disappear from the culture.
Comments