Creationist work colleague's attack on evolutionary theory?

He is using basic logic, not scientific deduction to attack your beliefs. THE most basic logic could easily disprove creationism. Despite the fact it's almost cartoonishly hilarious, if creationism was the accepted theory than the fossil evidence found would be profoundly different than what we have observed. For instance, for creationism to be true we should be finding fossils of a multitude of species dating back nearly 4 billion years. Yet that far back all we have found is fossil evidence of single celled prokaryotic and eukaryotic bacteria. If creationism were correct than why aren't there fossils of plants and animals that far back? Anyway, to answer your specific question, stating that an organism hasn't evolved based strictly on its appearance is purely speculative. Your colleague can never prove his argument because he cannot prove that the DNA of the dragonfly is exactly as it was 325 million years ago. Furthermore, evolution does not state that every organism has to evolve at the exact same rate. Just because humans evolved and other primates have not does not mean evolution is automatically false. It is not up to the scientist to prove that the succession of multiple species of fossils is evolutionary adaptation, the evidence proves it. It's like stating the sky is blue, pointing at the sky, just to have someone else say, well prove it! It is up to the skeptic to disprove the mass of fossil and DNA evidence supporting evolution, which nobody to date has yet to do, except for the pathetic logical arguments people like your collegue cling on to . Like I said, people like your colleague cling on to their logic to disprove scientific evidence, while their entire theory against it could easily be disproven with logic. Lets see here, fossil evidence, or a magnificent entity all of a sudden created everything and bam we were here. I mean, come on.