进化论不是已经否定了创造论吗？
Doesn't evolution disprove creation?
简答 Short Answer
宏观进化论（从单细胞到人类）仍然只是一个假说，面临许多科学挑战，并不能否定上帝作为创造者。微观进化（物种内的适应变化）是可观察的事实，但这与宏观进化是完全不同的概念。
Macro-evolution (single cells to humans) remains only a hypothesis facing many scientific challenges, and cannot disprove God as Creator. Micro-evolution (adaptive changes within species) is observable fact, but this is an entirely different concept from macro-evolution.
详细解答 Detailed Answer
首先，我们需要区分「微观进化」（物种内的变异和适应，如细菌抗药性、雀喙变化）和「宏观进化」假说（认为所有生物从单细胞共同祖先演变而来）。微观进化是可观察、可重复的科学事实；但宏观进化仍是一个未经证实的假说，面临着严重的科学挑战。
宏观进化假说的主要科学困难包括：（1）寒武纪大爆发——几乎所有主要动物门类在极短时间内突然出现，缺乏渐进过渡化石；（2）不可还原的复杂性——许多生物分子系统需要多个组件同时到位才能运作；（3）DNA中的遗传信息极其复杂，自然过程从未被观察到能产生这种水平的功能性信息；（4）化石记录中系统性缺乏宏观过渡形态。
虽然许多科学家持有宏观进化的立场，但科学不是投票制——历史上有许多被广泛接受后来被推翻的理论。基督徒不必因为'多数科学家接受'就觉得必须接受这一假说。
更重要的是，即使在进化假说的框架内，它也不能回答根本问题：为什么存在生命？为什么自然律存在？为什么宇宙的参数恰好允许生命存在？这些问题指向一位有目的的创造者。科学与信仰不是非此即彼的选择——真正的冲突是在有目的的宇宙（有神论）和无目的的宇宙（无神论）之间。
First, we must distinguish between micro-evolution (variation and adaptation within species, such as bacterial resistance and finch beak changes) and the macro-evolutionary hypothesis (claiming all life descended from a single-celled common ancestor). Micro-evolution is observable and repeatable scientific fact; but macro-evolution remains an unproven hypothesis facing serious scientific challenges.
Major scientific difficulties with the macro-evolutionary hypothesis include: (1) The Cambrian Explosion — nearly all major animal phyla appeared suddenly in a very brief period, lacking gradual transitional fossils; (2) Irreducible complexity — many molecular biological systems require multiple components simultaneously present to function; (3) The genetic information in DNA is extraordinarily complex, and natural processes have never been observed producing this level of functional information; (4) The systematic absence of macro-transitional forms in the fossil record.
While many scientists hold the macro-evolutionary position, science isn't a vote — history contains many widely-accepted theories that were later overturned. Christians need not feel they must accept this hypothesis just because 'most scientists accept it.'
More importantly, even within the evolutionary hypothesis framework, it cannot answer fundamental questions: Why does life exist? Why do natural laws exist? Why are the universe's parameters precisely tuned to permit life? These questions point to a purposeful Creator. Science and faith are not an either/or choice — the real conflict is between a purposeful universe (theism) and a purposeless one (atheism).