I've never understood why no one ever seems to consider the possibility of creation through evolution - must it always be either/or?
Interestingly enough, there are some in the intelligent design camp who are willing to accept that the Designer used evolution to give rise to man and other higher life forms. The evos tend to reject this -- they're not willing to accept allies who hold to the need for a theistic mover of evolution. Which, again, is evidence that what drives evolution isn't evidence, or science, but a philosophical bent toward atheism.
There are many who believe just that and many more who have considered that possibility and rejected it. ID advocates have looked at the scientific case for evolution and rejected it. Creationists have looked at scripture and rejected evolution.
If Evolution is right then Genesis appears to be wrong. Evolution requires long ages to occur. People try to reconcile that by assuming that the days of Genesis were long periods of anywhere from a thousand to millions of years.
But if that were true then there are other problems. Plants were created 3 days before the insects that pollinate them. If Genesis days are literal days, no problem. If they are thousands of years, then plants have a problem. Whales were specifically mentioned as being created a day before land animals. Adam was created on the 6th day and lived through the 7th day and his age at death was given in scripture. If the days of creation were a thousand years or more, then Adam's age makes no sense. Adam was created from the dust of the earth, not from evolution. Eve was created from Adam, not from evolution.
If evolution stands, Genesis falls.