I [...] make a prediction:
When confronted with evidence for evolution powered by natural selection, the creationist will select some sub-heading in the evidence and ask for further evidence about that. On being provided with it, he or she will simply repeat the process with the new evidence. This repetition can, in principle, be infinite. But human knowledge of anything is finite. Therefore, if the process is repeated sufficiently, the boundary of what is known will eventually be found, and the only honest answer will be “That is unknown at present”. The creationist will then smirk and declare himself the winner.
It’s simple, foolproof, and inevitable, and it impresses fools. A sufficiently adroit shyster can even succeed in presenting it as genuine enquiry, for a while. Most scientists have enormous goodwill about appears to be scientific enquiry. But of course, there is no intention to enquire, and their goodwill is being abused. It’s nothing but a scam, dishonest and mendacious from the start.