I propose this for the human origins section or I suppose it could fit into the ID section...
Since we seem to have a large enough crowd of evolution deniers, I would like to see how the creationist crowd addresses the issue of human chromosome #2. For those not aware,
Chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.  The evidence for this includes:
* The correspondence of chromosome 2 to two ape chromosomes. The closest human relative, the chimpanzee, has near-identical DNA sequences to human chromosome 2, but they are found in two separate chromosomes. The same is true of the more distant gorilla and orangutan.  * The presence of a vestigial centromere. Normally a chromosome has just one centromere, but in chromosome 2 we see remnants of a second.  * The presence of vestigial telomeres. These are normally found only at the ends of a chromosome, but in chromosome 2 we see additional telomere sequences in the middle. 
Fusion of ancestral chromosomes left distinctive remnants of telomeres, and a vestigial centromere
Chromosome 2 is thus strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. According to researcher J. W. IJdo:
We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.
Also from Wiki
I know a lot of the creation crowd will simply wave this off as god simply recycling genetic materials in his grand design. Question though, how does god recycle materials that he hadn't at that point created, since god spoke the animals into existence, then crafted man from the dirt(not the animals).
King James Bible writes:
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact â€” which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!" -Stephen Jay Gould