[Soliton]

So you will attack my beliefs, but you will not defend your own. You question my science, but refuse to state yours. I can not believe that anyone who understands atomic decay or sedimentary deposition, or even tree ring analysis could seriously defend a 10,000 year-old earth. A mechanical engineer should absolutely understand the second law. Why not state your case? If it is valid scientifically, I can’t and won’t argue.

[count-your-change]

You post assertions that evolution theory equals fact so its yours to defend. What I believe is irrelevant to the question of whether that theory represents truth, isn't it?
I could have no beliefs, all beliefs, any beliefs and it would do absolutely nothing to demonstrate the truthfulness or lack in evolution. So no, I see no point in shifting the focus to my beliefs (or that of “creationists” either).
Actually I see no more proof for a ten thousand year old earth than for evolution. But it is interesting you brought it up.