No, it comes down to whether you trust some words written in a book, or the hard evidence written upon the rocks of the Earth and the cells of your body.
You could show me scientific evidence that appears to make a case and if it contradicts what God has said, then it is your evidence or your interpretation that must be wrong.
If that's really the way you feel, then why do you bother debating the evidence? Its quality should be irrelevant to your position.
The quality may be irrelevant to my position. But that doesn't mean I have no interest in examining the evidence. I am very interested in creation and how it made. If the evidence challenges my preconceived notions, so be it.
But if evidence that challenges my preconceived notions include fakes and logic errors and bias, well that's evidence too.
If the evidence for evolution was not controversial, then I would simply wait for the Good Lord to explain why the evidence appears thusly. Because their is obviously something I don't understand between what He said and what the evidence is.
It is not merely trusting some words in a book. The bible is backed up by miracles which demonstrate God's power and prophecies which demonstrate God's foreknowledge. That makes this particular book a lot harder evidence than a mere book. Add to that answered prayer and you have a lot of hard evidence supporting that book.
Now compare that to the evidence presented by evolutionists. They presume to know what happened thousands and millions of years ago, but when you start looking at how many assumptions that have to make to come up with their conclusions, it doesn't appear to be "hard" evidence at all.
I wonder that myself. I think the goal is to convert the non-believers. In the past, that would have been done at swordpoint. Now, they're limited to hijacking school boards and making laughingstocks of certain parts of the country.