As the core intelligent Design authors point out, "evolution" as used by the hard sciences is based on random mutation.
In original Darwinism, mutation was taken to be happening in the whole biological organism.
In Neo-Darwinism, mutation was taken to happen in the DNA of biological organisms.
Both versions of "evolution" also include natural selection, of the most survivable organisms. (This is in one sense, an unfalsifiable concept. Whatever organisms survive, are said to be the most fit to survive.)
The arguments of the core Intelligent Design authors, is that randomness is not strong enough to produce the complex information that we see in biological organisms. and especially in DNA patterns, and molecular machines. This is a probabilistic argument, based on available resources.
I point out this dependency on randomness, because probability theory (and Computer science) uses the analysis of the power of randomness, to delineate what is probable, and what is not probable, and what is computable (in algorithms), and what is not computable.
Other definitions of "evolution" are not what the hard sciences are formally using.
There are all sorts of people discussing "evolution" as if it is an undefined process of how something, somehow, changes. But the scientific definition of evolution is based on randomness.
As an after-comment, required Christian doctrine (such as the Nicene Creed) requires only that we believe in God, maker of the heavens and the earth. There are no core Christian doctrines that require us to believe that a specific hard scientific model of "evolution" is true (that is, HOW God created the heavens and the earth). Before about 1900 (and Darwin's theory), we do not find Western Christians worried about HOW God created the heavens and the earth. It was not a core topic in Christian discussion. I suggest that modern Christians should return to that position.
As an after-comment, all the core Intelligent Design authors hold to an old earth model.
God having literally created this Universe, means of course He created the laws of nature that operate, what is called "physics".
And, since any operation/process/event in Nature, including of course all aspects, what might seem 'random chance' etc., is of course just physics in action...
Just nature operating.
To a believer that believes God created this Universe (raises hand), then it follows whatever happens in nature is already by belief (you can see) of course God's design at work doing what
He set it out to do.
Nature is literally doing what He made it to do.
Does that make sense? please ask questions if you like, I'm not ideological on it, and very happy to discuss it at any length (also I don't need help on understanding physics stuff like Quantum Mechanics, etc., as I have a background in physics, and have long followed research news, etc., but what I'm pointing out
doesn't rely on understanding Quantum Mechanics or Bell Test Experiments, etc.)
On a related topic, the way we measure the distance to nearby stars distance is by parallax, which in recent decades has been also refined to be more far reaching using the Hubble space telescope.
It's now accurate out to about 10,000 light years distance.
Can you see the implication?
Having personally done the classic rotating mirror measuring of the speed of light in air myself, personally having measured the speed to be about 300,000 km/second, literally with my own hands and eyes and a laser, rotating mirror, beam splitting prism, light interrupter, tape measure and a calculator.... And doing all the measurement and calculation myself.
And also we have confirmations that the speed of light is also the same far out in space from our probes like the Voyager probes that have now gone vastly far past Pluto's orbit (and also additional confirmations of the constant speed of light far away in other methods)....
So, the unambiguous implication is of course that background stars that do
not have detectable parallax motion during Earth's annual orbit about the sun
must be more distant than 10,000 light years (else they'd have parallax motion also like nearby stars do....) and
therefore the light from those stars that have no parallax motion that is arriving to our telescopes is
older than 10,000 years.
And that relies basically on
just trigonometry alone.
No theory needed.
It's just pure and simple trigonometry, like you learned in high school.
Ergo, of course our galaxy and the Universe are far older than 10,000 years old, etc.
So, it's just observational, like seeing that the moon orbits the Earth is observationally true -- we can see that all young Earth theories are false, simply by looking visually at stars with telescopes and using trigonometry.
God created all that exists, but it's far older than 10,000 years.