And he's right. In order to believe in evolution - and we're talking macro-evolution here - one would have to believe that it's possible to get life from inanimate matter through natural processes, something that science has proven to be impossible.
- A study of the history of science will show that at times science itself has been an impediment to scientific advancement. For example, after Italian biologist Francesco Redi (1626–1697) successfully challenged the dogmatism of spontaneous generation which had been for so long based on Greek "science," some scientists still clung to elements of the outmoded theory. Even when additional experiments by Louis Pasteur (1822–1895) showed that "microscopic beings must come into the world from parents similar to themselves," skepticism remained. Ernst Haeckel (1834–1919), a chief proponent of Darwinism, stated in 1876, 25 years after Pasteur's famous experiment, "If we do not accept the hypothesis of spontaneous generation, then at this one point in the history of evolution we must have recourse to the miracle of a supernatural creation." Haeckel chose spontaneous generation even though there was no empirical evidence to support it because he did not like the alternative - belief in God. Don't be surprised by Haeckel's irrationalism. Despite the evidence to the contrary, a number of high profile modern-day evolutionists have constructed their theory of origins on the rejected premise that life as we know it today developed (evolved) from non-life.
If you're looking for the punchline to the joke that is evolution, try looking to scripture. Genesis 1:1 is a good place to start.