First, we must define what we mean by evolution.  Many think evolution is simply stating that life forms can change as a result of their environment.  Creationists accept that things can change in this way, but this is better described as the effect of natural selection, not evolution.  Natural selection and evolution are not the same thing, although many evolutionists like to give examples of natural selection within an environment providing change and infer that this is evolution.  However, this is simply variation within a kind based on the variability that is already programmed within the creatures DNA code.  No 'evolution' has occurred.

       What naturalistic evolutionists mean by evolution is the particles-to-people concept that involves ever increasing amounts of information being added to the DNA code.  Evolution defined in this manner believes that natural selection and chance mutations provide this mechanism to increase the complexity of the creature's genetic make-up.  However, this cannot be observed.  Never do we observe new information being added to the genetic make-up of creatures as a result of mutations.  Mutations are virtually always a loss of information.  At most, they are a mixing or sorting of the already present information, not a mechanism of providing new information.  Evolutionists still believe this occurred in the past and is the mechanism to how we got the ever increasing DNA code of all creatures today.  However, this is nothing more than a belief system, similar to how creationists believe God created original kinds of animals with a point of origin and the variability programmed into their DNA to adapt to different environments.

       Here lies the reason naturalistic evolution is not true science, but a belief system.  The scientific method demands that we have something that we can observe.  Then we can make a hypothesis and perform repeatable tests to see if our hypothesis can be proven true (for example, we can do this with gravity).  Only then can we begin to determine if our hypothesis is correct and start to develop it into a scientific theory.  However, this cannot be done for naturalistic evolution.  No one was there in the past to observe if this information adding evolution really occurred in the genetic code and we cannot observe it happening today.  Therefore, evolution cannot be classified as a result of real observational science. It can only be classified in terms of historical science, which is more philosophical in nature and subject to biases (i.e. Religious). Therefore, molecules-to-man evolution is a faith position and not a scientific theory from observational science.

      Creationists do know someone who was there in the beginning, and He is the Creator of the universe and tells us He created original kinds from the beginning.  Additionally, the evidence as seen in the complexity of the DNA code points not to a mindless chance random process, but to an Intelligent Creator who had a purpose for the things He created.

       Whether one believes in evolution has nothing to do with real observational science, which has been able to accomplish amazing things like putting man on the moon and building complex computer systems.  Don't let anyone tell you not believing in evolution is equivalent to not believing in science.