Picture your country's currency. For me, that's the Great British Pound (GBP, £). We have various coins and banknotes representing the Pound, from 1p (pence/penny) coins to £50 notes.
Now consider this: There are no scientific experiments you can do that can prove these things have value, or to determine how much value they have. You can weigh them, but putting them in order of weight will inevitably result in them being placed out of value order. You can test what they're made of, but that's not really mathematical, so again you won't be able to use that to put them in order of value. You can see how much pressure they can withstand, what their melting point is, but not a single experiment you can do would put them in value order.
The reason we know how much value a coin or banknote has is because of the value ascribed to it by its creator. A £1 coin is objectively less valuable than a £20 note, not because of any quality they have, but because the coin was only designed to represent one Pound, whereas the note was designed to represent £20. The value comes from the design.
Just as there is no possible way to scientifically determine the value of currency, so also is there no way to scientifically determine the value of life. But if there's one thing most of us agree on, it's that life is valuable, but not all life is equally valuable. Other than a few psychopaths who unfortunately take Evolution to its logical conclusion and assume all life is equally devoid of value, no one ascribes the same value to all life. Consider the following examples:
We market cleaning products by how many germs they kill. Can you imagine marketing a product by how many humans it can kill? Or if some berk decided it's time to take Cilit Bang off the shelves because germs are as valuable as we are?
We breed animals to either harvest their products, or to eat them. Can you imagine breeding humans for their products or meat, or if vegans ruled the world and it was completely illegal to farm animals?
We catch fish to eat. Can you imagine fishing for humans, or if someone reasoned we can't fish anymore because we wouldn't eat humans?
We cut down trees to build things, or even just to burn them. Can you imagine cutting down humans to make stuff out of them, or just to burn them, or if someone decided we can't justify using wood products or burn firewood?
We use horses or oxen to do farm work for no wages, only food and shelter. I'm fairly certain there was a civil war to save people from being forced to do the same. Can you imagine a civil war being launched to save animal slaves from slavery?
We put animals in zoos. Evolutionists used to do the same (look up Ota Benga), but that's considered racist today. Why is it not considered racist to put gorillas, chimps and other creatures in zoos? Or why is it considered evil to try to wipe out the "savage races", as Darwin predicted white people would?
I could go on, but I think you see my point. Not even Evolutionists believe all life is equally valuable, and many don't even think all human life is equally valuable, but they treat life as if it has value, and arbitrarily decide how to assign it. You can't prove, scientifically, that life has value, neither can you scientifically justify the knowledge that humans are more valuable than other organisms. It's just like Paul says: Those who do not have the law do, by nature, the things in the law, showing that the law is written on their hearts. They know that morality exists, and every time they act like it, they prove it. So really, whenever an Evolutionist walks into a KFC with a clear conscience, they're actually admitting that they know there's a higher power, whether they explicitly admit it or not.
But the same conscience that tells them "this is right, this is wrong" should tell them that they have done things wrong. They are not in good standing with God, and He will call them into judgement one day. On our own, none of us will pass that trial. A guilty verdict followed by eternal punishment awaits all rebels. But God loves His creations dearly, to the point where He declared His original creation "very good". So He didn't leave it at "you're guilty, to Hell with you". No. Jesus Christ, the word by which the heavens and the earth were made, entered Creation as a man, lived a perfect life, and died for our sins. Through Him, everything we've ever done wrong can be forgiven. All it takes is faith. That faith is both easier and more rewarding than silly fairy tales about how we're related to monkeys.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An attempted response from an atheist
When this article was originally published as a post on the God Squad Apologetics Facebook page, an atheist attempted to respond with the following:
"We can scientifically determine the order, we can do a sociological experiment where we bring people off the street and ask them to rank notes and coins by value.
Money is given value because we as a society have agreed that it has value, it doesn't have inherent value."
The flaw in the experiment is that it proves the very point the article intends to make. The people you take off the street would be within the "designer" category. They can order the notes and coins by value because they are among those who determine said value.
But let's imagine two separate cultures. As a British man, I am both familiar with British currency, and capable of reading any text on it. But hand me money from another culture, suddenly things get a lot harder. Now, it does appear, having Googled it, that currency across the globe uses English numbers, so I could probably take a stab at it anyway, but let's just pretend I can't even read numbers. Could I do the same experiment to find out the value order of, for example, Chinese money? Yes, if I acknowledge both the existence and the authority of the Chinese culture!
But what if I'm a complete numpty and come up with a conspiracy theory about how China was made up to explain the existence of renminbi coins and notes, whereas in reality these are just the result of nature? Not only would I be daft for trying to explain the existence of designed objects without acknowledging the designer, but I would also be inconsistent in assuming they have any value at all, much less that they can be arranged in a specific order to reflect that.
In the same way, Evolutionists are daft and inconsistent. Daft for trying to explain obvious design without giving the Designer His due credit, and inconsistent for assuming those designs have any value at all. If Evolution is true, the sanctity of human life is simply a pleasant illusion. Only if God exists can any life be of any value. Thus, ironically, the atheist proved the very point he was trying to refute.