Dr. Tek, you're in the same position as Yo, apparently - closing your eyes, plugging your ears, and saying nanananana.
I mean, the brightest beacon in your post is that you mention "contradiction" in evolution, and go on to cite thermodynamics as one of them. This shows a complete lack of understanding of both evolution and thermodynamics. Even Answers In Genesis, the popular Creationist website, has "The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics Contradicts Evolution" on their list of arguments
not to use.
Now, how the hell can you call evolution not scientific? I will never understand that. Evolution has indeed been proven -- that is, it has been observed. Gravity is a theory, just as evolution is. Would you argue against the occurance of gravity? And yet, its only a theory because they're not sure
how it works, though they have some ideas. It's the same with evolution.
Now, here's an extensive list of observed speciation and citations:
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
Furthermore, evolution is falsifiable and has made correct predictions. I urge you to consider the scientists who began studying genes -- evolutionists were worried about what their findings might reveal. Yet, they were pleased to see that the findings in the gene studies agreed with and paralleled the ideas of evolution. Right there, evolution could have been dealt quite a blow, yet multiple fields of science verify it.
Creation, on the other hand, is unfalsifiable. It is was a supposedly 6-day occurance. It is not longer observable. It cannot make any useful predictions for the present time. Creationism does not even qualify as a scientific hypothesis, much less a theory!
Now, I must say, Dr. Tek, that you are quite presumptuous. You tell me that before I start making accusations, I should "do well to be informed on [my] subject." I am -- what made you think I would not be? You know what assumptions make out of us...