>> perhaps it might be more prudent to check the accuracy of the theology,<<
Perhaps it might be more prudent of the evolutionists to check the accuracy of their belief in a system that cannot demonstrate how life came about from non-life.
I am neither a evolutionist nor a creationist. I simply state the argument for the position that is most plausible of the two. One is supported by logic and a scientific method and the other is based on faith and belief with little evidence. It would be more logical and I would prefer to argue proofs for and against evolution based on the tenets and proposals of proof for evolution. Concerning creation I would would argue for and against the philosophy of creation using Descarte's Six Ontological Proofs for and against The Existence Of God. If one can prove the existence of God then by extension he has also proved the Theory of Creation. The question then becomes how was God the Creator created or invented. To simply argue the case of Creation against Evolution is mostly a waste of thought. The case for or against either cannot be argued logically because there is no determined format for proofs that might be acceptable. The argument for Creation does not accept scientific method and deduction as a proof even though the the very civilization they live in was comprised and accomplished with scientific method and deduction. Their argument for creation is I think it, believe it, have faith in it, I was taught it, I say it is so, and I don't need proof. This position cannot be refuted within the context of their thought. Creation VS evolution also excludes other possibilities that are rarely presented in a thoughtful manner.
Too shallow...perhaps it'd be better to say as "necessarily both necessary and sufficient" for proof.
There are passages in Hilaire Belloc's The Great Heresies which take the opposite view (faith is necessary to defend reason; as well as the argument of G.K. Chesterton (IIRC in The Everlasting Man) which defend empiricism--to paraphrase, "If you have a flawed theory of how to build an airplane, and you insist on the theory, the airplane will correct it by crashing to the ground."
Cheers!