I used to argue for evolution for many, many years. But I got tired of lying to myself about what the evidence actually says. My heart wouldn't be in it as it was once upon a time because I would know I would be lying....
My argument about the perfect genome degrading over time would be to simply ignore the genomic data as an evolutionist.
My argument about soft tissue would be to plead to a laboratory experiment in which they had to centrifuge the iron out of the blood because just having blood was not enough to do the job. So I would have to leave out the part of the centrifuge which isn't found in nature....... just so my claim would seem to have the slightest possibility....
My argument about the fossil record would be to claim in one post that the fossil record definitely proves evolution, then in another unrelated post claim it doesn't matter what it shows as it isn't needed.... when the creationists destroyed my argument by showing no change in any creature.....
And although I certainly support faith, I would have to place my faith in missing common ancestors that split to become separate creatures. Then point out to the creationist that his Adam and Eve ancestors are missing. Then duck and dodge when the creationists then pointed out that he was not the one proposing that our ancestors were anything but human, so a claim that postulates humans come from anything but other humans demands evidence, not faith...... I am pretty sure the creationists faith that humans only produce other humans would hold up under all direct observations..... so I would have to duck and dodge.... and implement the magic words "after millions of years"........
I could argue mutations are beneficial, but then I would have to ignore that experiments show almost all are deleterious, most of the rest neutral, then the rare one beneficial, but it usually comes with side-effects.... I would then argue that "over millions of years" the beneficial ones add up, while ignoring the deleterious ones effects adding up over millions of years altogether..... I would then argue but natural selection weeds out the harmful ones, while ignoring that small mutations over time adding up are more likely to add up to another deleterious outcome than a beneficial one..... so in the end get nowhere....
No, it's a loosing battle, which is why I am on the winning side..... God's side.....
