Creationism doesn't fit the definition of science. Science doesn't start with a conclusion and then fit all evidence to prove that conclusion. But that's exactly what "creation science" does. They always start with the idea of biblical creationism being the only explanation of our existence and then fit all data to match that conclusion. Anything that doesn't fit is discarded even if it disproves the idea, and anything that remotely supports the idea is loudly touted as truth. This is not how science works.
And frankly, all "creation science" arguments boil down to once you take out the "life looks designed to me, therefore it was designed" arguments is nothing more than attacks on evolution, as if destroying evolutionary theory means that creationism wins by default. Again, this is not science.
You claiming that creationism is science and declaring yourself the winner is nothing more than your own delusion of grandeur.
And frankly, all "creation science" arguments boil down to once you take out the "life looks designed to me, therefore it was designed" arguments is nothing more than attacks on evolution, as if destroying evolutionary theory means that creationism wins by default. Again, this is not science.
You claiming that creationism is science and declaring yourself the winner is nothing more than your own delusion of grandeur.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.