No law of nature evolves.
Thanks. Now we can dispose of the creationist argument of non constant radioactive decay rates?
If evolution is supposed to be a primary power or source of life, where are the indicators?
The reactions of physical chemistry. The complex folding of proteins due to physical forces resulting in high specificity to act as enzymes that catalyze specific reactions. Chemistry removes the assertion that random processes cannot account for the organization that life presents. Natural selection superimposed upon the cycle of self replication removes the rest.
Please watch
"Evolution is a blind watchmaker".
Glycolysis, which is a very non-efficient (a factor of 18 less efficient than respiration) method to acquire stored energy for the cell. It indicates an ancient development, being utilized by all forms of life, and indicates it developed prior to oxygen becoming available in the atmosphere.
What law of nature even hints at that?
Where is the Foundation of Evolution?
On what Law of Science does it stand?
It is a law of nature in itself. It has been demonstrated to work by computer simulations, eliminating the creationist argument that it can't be observed because of the necessity of the passage of eons of time that forbid direct observation.
As a counter consideration, consider the creationist argument which relies upon acceptance of the bible or 'sola scriptura' for its foundation.
You are relying upon scripture as the ultimate arbiter of 'truth'.
An observation about a 'sola scriptura' approach to 'truth';
As I hope you are aware there are a multitude of interpretations of the bible.
So to postulate that God communicates to man via the bible one has to additionally postulate that there is a single correct interpretation of the bible. Now the problem is how to distinguish that correct interpretation from all other interpretations. If the bible is only allowed to make that determination we are stuck. So now there must exist something external to the bible by which the determination can be accomplished. So sola scriptura is invalidated as a correct approach to 'truth', even for people who accept faith as the basis for determining ultimate reality.