This battle is not about someone else’s ideas versus our ideas. We need to decide what is a valid thought. This is really the basis of the difference between the two arguments. What authority will govern how we interpret facts. Evolutionists try to say that they are neutral, but they are not. All science and knowledge operates in terms of world-views and paradigms. In other words, there is a religion behind all science.  Most evolutionists are working from a basis of a liberal religion such as Secular Humanism or Agnosticism or Atheism or liberal Christianity, which is simply a cloak for one of the three previously mentioned religions. Creationists and evolutionists are looking at the same facts but coming up with different conclusions.  Evolutionists assume no God, no flood, no miracles, no spirits, no creation, rejecting all observation that conflicts with these assumptions.  Creationists have no such presuppositions and take their observations as ample evidence of God, the worldwide flood, miracles, spirits, and creation.  In coming to conclusions from the data, something must be added to the data.  The thing that is added to the data is either divine revelation or else it is human revelation.  Evolutionists tend to believe in human revelatory powers, while creationists tend to believe that God has the ability to reveal, especially through the Bible.  Both these tendencies to believe in miraculous revelation have been tested and it appears that the creationists are correct and the evolutionists are wrong.  The human mind does not have any ability to reveal and the Bible continues to stand against all attacks.  In addition, the Bible lines up with what can be observed, but the assumptions of Humanism, Atheism, Agnoticism, and liberal Christianity do not line up with what can be observed.