There is no such thing as "empirical" evidence of evolution. No evolution has ever been observed. By anyone. And that makes evolution a pseudo-science, one based on assumptions made and guessed at (and proven wrong time and time again). Rather, evolution is a system of faith - because there is no empirical evidence, the person who accepts evolution must accept the words of those who propagate the teachings. And that is faith.
Christianity is also faith. But herein lies the difference: Christianity is faith in the Creator God, based on His Word - and He was there at the time of creation, so He would know. Evolution is faith in fallible men who have been proven to be in error over and over. Let me see, as I reason this out...to which faith will I subscribe? Which is the more reasonable and logical? Hmmm...it would have to be to accept the words of the One Who was actually there. God is a God of reason and of logic, of order and of truth. He can be completely trusted in all areas, science included (let's never forget that "scientists" used to teach that the earth was the center of the universe, among other things that have been empirically proven incorrect - like spontaneous generation. Empirical observation has proven that life must come from life. And it all began when God said, "Let there be...").
I think Henry Morris, who was not an IFB, put it very well in this article (apologies in advance for the length), The Splendid Faith of the Evolutionist
"Christian faith is essential for salvation (Ephesians 2:8) but in one sense it is not all that difficult to have this kind of faith. After all, the amazing majesty, beauty and complexity of the universe should make it easy to believe in a great Creator God (Psalm 19:1; Romans 1:20), and the overwhelming body of objective evidence for the historicity of the person and work of Jesus Christ—including His bodily resurrection from the grave makes it easy enough to believe in His saving power. 1
But the faith of the evolutionist and humanist is of another order altogether. His is a splendid faith indeed, a faith not dependent on anything so mundane as evidence or logic, but rather a faith strong in its childlike trust, relying wholly on omniscient Chance and omnipotent Matter to produce the complex systems and mighty energies of the universe.
The Harvard zoologist, P.D. Darlington, has penned a remarkable statement of this evolutionary faith, in his book Evolution for Naturalists. Acknowledging that the creative abilities of Matter are entirely enigmatic, he nevertheless bravely believes in them:
Is not this a fine statement of faith? Even after looking down many avenues of potential evidence, Professor Darlington, more than 200 pages later, is still able to assert there is no evidence and thus his faith is still pure.
The evolutionist faces a great temptation here, a serious stumblingblock to his faith. It seems utterly impossible that dead Matter could create Life. At this point, surely, he will have to defer to logic and acknowledge that Life must be produced by a Cause which is itself alive. After all, scientists long ago showed experimentally that life comes only from life.
This faith in the life-generating powers of Matter glows even more brightly in light of the confessed bafflement of those scientists most familiar with the nature of life and its inexplicable naturalistic origin. One of these has said:
In fact, the author of this confession, Dr. Orgel, seems at first to have wavered somewhat in his own faith. He and Dr. Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the remarkably complex DNA molecule, now known to be a basic component of life and of the genetic code which controls the reproduction of all living systems, have acknowledged that life was too complex to have arisen naturalistically in the few billion years of earth history.
In actuality, however, their faith is still strong, perhaps even stronger than that of other evolutionists. They believe in "directed panspermia," the amazing notion that lifeseeds were planted on earth by an unknown civilization from some other world in outer space! The mere statement of this concept is itself adequate testimony to the grand credulity of the faith of these fine evolutionists, since there exists not one iota of scientific evidence for such ethereal civilizations.
Another evolutionist of bold faith is Richard Dawkins, originator and popularizer of the remarkable concept of "selfish genes", an idea which itself bespeaks an unusual type of faith. Dawkins, who is on the faculty in zoology at England's famed Oxford University, maintains an unshakeable faith in Darwinian evolution, even at the molecular level, in spite of all the modern attacks thereon by fellow evolutionists. He acknowledges, of course, that the logical thing is to believe in God.
Even though it is, indeed, quite obvious that every complex and purposeful system which man has ever seen produced throughout history has been the product of an intelligent human designer, Professor Dawkins is willing to believe that life itself, far more complex than any man-made contrivance, was not designed. He dismisses God in these patronizing words:
He is right, of course. It requires only a very ordinary sort of faith to explain a given effect by a cause adequate to produce the effect. Much more faith is required, an extra-ordinary faith, to believe that effects are produced by causes that are not able to produce them! To believe that non-living matter can create life, that chaotic disorder can evolve itself into organized complexity, that unthinking atoms can sort themselves into thinking human beings,—here is a worthy faith!
Evolutionary faith is not limited to biologists, of course. It can be appropriated by evolutionary humanists in philosophy, in economics, in politics, in all fields. A first-rate example was Adolph Hitler, whose implicit faith in Darwinism ("the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life", as the sub-title of Darwin's Origin of Species put it) gave him the vision and courage to array his assumed "master race" against the world, believing that its triumph would be for the greater good of all mankind in its ongoing evolutionary progress. Although his armies finally went down to defeat, he still retained his great faith!
Note the strong and unselfish evolutionary faith of Adolph Hitler, willing even to sacrifice his entire Teutonic "race" and finally to take his own life, to advance the cause of evolution.
Finally, let us consider the remarkable faith of Isaac Asimov, the most prolific science writer of our generation. Asimov believes that our present universe began with the Big Bang of a primeval cosmic egg, whose initial explosion led to the formation of chemical elements, stars, galaxies and finally people. Now note his fine statement of faith.
Now explosions commonly produce disorder and disintegration, so this greatest of all explosions must have produced the ultimate in disorder and disintegration. Evolution requires, however, that the great Bang somehow yield great order and complex structures. Dr. Asimov, therefore, believes that the primeval egg possessed an almost infinitely high degree of order, even though it had no structure.
Herein we encounter Asimov's deep faith. In all normal systems with which scientists work, "structure" and "order" are essentially synonymous, equivalent also to "information," "complexity," "organization," "integration" and other such terms. If it did what evolutionists believe it did, the primeval egg certainly must have possessed a tremendous amount of organizing information and it thus seems nonsensical to say it had no structure. Asimov believes not only in run-of-the-mill impossibilities but in the equivalence of opposites ("no structure" = "high order").
However, Dr. Asimov does feel it necessary to attempt some kind of rationalization, knowing that people of lesser faith might otherwise stumble.
At this point, he makes another leap of faith, proposing that the universe—instead of expanding, as he believes it is doing now—was contracting, with everything somehow in reverse and with its order increasing as it contracted. For this to be possible, of course, gravitational attraction has to be invoked to pull it together. The problem with this belief, however, is that the total mass of the matter in the universe is far too small to allow this ever to happen.
Such a problem as this does not overcome the faith of an Asimov. He can handle it merely by another act of faith.
Asimov's hunch, therefore, solves it all.
We creationists, admittedly, find it difficult to believe all these things that evolutionists manage to believe. But we have always had a high regard for the principle of faith, even though our own faith is rather weak, based as it is on such strong evidence as almost to compel belief in the God of creation and redemption. We must, therefore, at least express admiration for the remarkable faith of the evolutionist."