What evidence is needed to change a creationist

"(1) change the subject - common
(2) accuse you of lying - less common, but happens often enough
(3) disappear from the argument (while telling themselves they won -- see NJ & Buzz on the Pattern recognition thread) - also common
(4) move the goal-posts (a variation of (1)) where they try to redefine the argument - also common

​

When it comes to actually confronting the evidence on the other side of their cognitive dissonance wall people become functionally stupid, because they are not able to fit the information into their world view. Not only that, they don't see the wall."

Well evolutionists do the same exact thing. If they don't want to hear what a creationist has to say they just say that it's a lie or they through out a big fat PRATT.

But you have to realize that creationist have no way of testing our "theories" but every day a evolutionist is testing something different. Then when they have 1 successful test they say that it's been proven, they do small experiments and use them as base for evolutionary life. Things work differently on a large scale than on a smaller scale. The things from long times ago are different than the things we have today. They have matured and micro-evolved to survive in new environments, the world is constantly changing. Look at a river a thousand years ago. Now it has either dried up or has grown. There is no way to know what happened at the beginning of time. So it's just crazy to "prove" something by doing modern experiments and call it fact!