1.Creationists claim the Earth is much younger than geology scholars. They claim Earth is about 6000 years old and they claim radiocarbon dating is inaccurate.
NO MISSSING LINK FOR HUMANS OR OTHER SPECIES
2.There is no missing link for hominids, and we see in fossils an abrupt change from apes to hominids.
3.The creationists claim there is no change of kind in species through mutations. Experiments on fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) showed that by inducing mutations we obtain mutant flies but never a new species.
4. Some hominids fossils found turned out to be hoaxes or were damaged.
INCOMPLETE FOSSILS
5.Hominid fossils found are mostly incomplete and for Denisovans we have only some teeth which are huge and were thought to be from a bear. Reconstructions have no basis and are based on imagination.
LIVING FOSSILS OCCURING OUT OF NOWHERE
6.Living fossils such as Tuatara, Coelacanths, Gingko biloba or Horseshoe crabs disappeared from fossils layers hundreds of million years ago to reappear today.
OPARIN AND HALDANE HYPOTHESIS
7. Evolution theory cannot explain how life emerged. The Oparin Haldane experiment claimed amino acids were obtained from primordial soup but there is no theory how cells emerged from nothing.
DNA … DNA…
8.Evolution cannot explain how DNA was created, and simple species have DNA like humans.
DARWIN HIMSELF QUESTIONNED HIS THEORY…
9. The creationists claim the birds from Galapagos were the same species and showed variations in the same species and no evolution.
NEANDERTHALS
10. Creationists claim Neanderthals were like us and their reconstruction is based on an incomplete skeleton of a diseased Neanderthal.
I am not a creation advocate
but I wanted to share my thoughts with you guys. In conclusion both theories have flaws and they should be merged : nature itself is a creator and it is eliminating species found inadequate and is creating new species for a purpose we are to small to understand?