Why Evolution Cannot Be a Fact

Theory of evolution is a serious attempt to explain our existence. It does away with the need of a creator for our existence. It is based on serious observations wherein predominantly lack of purpose is noted.

Theory of evolution has generated unprecedented debate so far. In fact when it was put forth, many a religious dogmas were being challenged. Young generations had come up with various intriguing questions. However when their sincere questions could not be answered logically, many a truth seekers embraced the religion of evolution. This was not out of conviction but a Hobson's choice, because a human mind refuses to stay in a confused state for a long time.The failure of the contemporary religions, predominantly Christianity to provide concrete answers led to the acceptance of this theory on a large scale.

I have made a sincere attempt to find the truth and have arrived at a conclusion that evolution is not a fact.The logic is very simple.

The bible gives a very vivid description of the creation.It says that the original creation was full of harmony among humans, animals and in between humans and animals. Man and all animals were vegetarians.There were no carnivorous elements. All the carnivores came to picture as a result of Adamic sin and Noah's flood.

So, by the time Darwin came on the scene, the whole scenario was damaged. It would be very much wrong to say that what evolutionists observe is incorrect.They are perfectly right in their observations.In fact, their observations could be commended. However they lack the ability to get to know, understand and accept the fact that this is not what God had created.This is distorted creation.Everything is distorted, even the human minds .Any observations based on such distorted facts are bound to give a distorted inference.

The most noteworthy observation is that in the creation, there is no real purpose noticed.This is true observation, but could it be a scenario where once purpose was involved, something went wrong, and the creator has to settle some other issue first?
e.g. A person is driving a motorcycle. Somebody just gives an offside push from rear.The motorcycle sways in a zigzag line.

An observer observes the later part only. He refuses to take cognizance of the past and infers that the driver is drunk. He fails to take into account that the bikes' line of motion is distorted, and the inference derived on this observation is distorted equally.

Could the inference be rendered as a fact?