Amazingly weak and unscientific arguments form both sides. Statistics are massively weighted AGAINST evolution as male and female entitites had to develop complex proteins and multiply stepped processes involving more proteins at the same time in close physical proximity in two nearly identical living organisms and then these organisms had to require each other to propogate life. For evolution to be true it has to be some sort of isolated singular event that is beyond possible. It is like a child throwing a penny in a pool in Vegas but through random chance it bounces, rolls and shimmys into the 1 in a googleplex penny slot machine to win the once in a millenia jackpot of the entire Milky Way as a prize. Kinda weighted against it. Also, keep in mind that it is still only a Theory as concrete evidence has not been confirmed to produce undeniable facts that this theory explains all of the observable evidence. What if some day an evolution believing atheistic phsyicist discovers evidence of God in the unified field theory or String theory?

Regarding God. He did it the way he did it and a true scientist is open to all possibilities, even those that might be counter intuitive to a theological belief system. There is a huge difference between making assertions and logically producing evidence to support a claim. The accuracies within the bible have been proven to make the bible a viable surce of information. It behooves the apologist to understand some basic truths within the bible such as documented prophecy concerning King Darius by Daniel hundreds of years before the King Darius released the Jews to rebuild the temple. Hammurabi's code is suspected to have come from God through Melchizedek via Abraham. When someone clings to a scientific belief as if it were a theology and defends it as faith, you are proselytizing to another religion rather than a scientist. You must appeal to the scientist through alternate hypotheses and theories, supported by documentable evidence to demonstrate its viability as a valid counter theory. A true scientist is a seeker of truth. A true scientist, to be wrong and to discover the truth of how things work, is a greater prize. Edison didn't fail 1000's of times, he just found the ways that didn't work. I do't see why there is such a divide between science and religion - they are both seeking the same thing - TRUTH. The universe was made to operate in one way and we will eventually discover it. Delving deep into particle physics etc. intorduces you to some really bizarre events that leave you in awe of the universe and how intricately it operates and was assembled to operate on its own. That awe is humbling enough to eliminate the ego and petty bickering of truth seekers, but will never silence the fool.