If you're on trial for killing a black man, and you know you definitely killed him, and you get convicted of murder by a jury full of the most racist black people you can find, you think there's a bias there?
I didnt say the man was 100% guilty, i said he is on trial. Yes it would be biased and unfair.

If it were invalid, I wouldn't use it. It is the case though that scientists have used the experiment as recently as 2009 with conclusive results. No scientists have ever ruled out the first early atmosphere, they have only tested other ideas.
Yes an experiment that was based on a theory of what the atmosphere could have been....thats not empiricle evidence and is there for invalid.

which is....the bible?
No, by the same clearly existing evidence used by the "evolutionists", just interpreted differently. You agreed early in the thread to there being more than one possible interpretation.

I didn't say adaptation wasn't separate.
I am glad this is understood, many unlearned believers in an intelligent designer are unaware of this.

Are you serious right now? There is a separate theory for this! I've said it a million times. Abiogenesis. They are separate. They always have been. The only people using evolution as propaganda are the Christian Right.

Evolution = how single cells evolve into humans

Abiogenesis = how the cells came to be in the first place

I understand science the same way I understand math. I don't believe in evolution like I don't "believe" in the order of operations in mathematics. I know both of them work. Atheism is not a religion, evolution is not something you believe in, it is something everyone except the misinformed understand.
Once again you present evolution as some "universal" fact. Which is wrong. It is one way of interpreting the available evidences. And as far as atheism goes....see Richard Dawkins. That man spends more time spreading atheistic doctrine than studying evolution.

Since when does a single theory have to explain everything? No one knows what causes gravity (many think it has something to do with dark matter) but it doesn't stop us from believing it because we have the evidence that it exists.
True. But you and other "evolutionists" pass on a theory as fact that does not even explain where it originated. Creationalism not only gives a how but a why. Once again like every other proponent of evolution you pick and choose which issues to dismiss and which to continue discussing. I see this tactic all the time, its called politics. Science is supposed to present itself as fallible, yet every single evolutionist, seeks only to prove themselves right. In my mind that is biased and disqualifies the theory and men behind it due to the fact that they contradict the very purpose of science and the scientific method.