Why is it that God couldn't have made Creation with evolution?

It wouldn't. Nor would it work in a universe where a supernatural entity could come in and change things around by fiat, or make things appear counter to how they actually happened.There is no reason to posit a "random chance world" when we have physical laws that constrain the possibilities. Tentativity is the hallmark of science. If something we have been studying for 100s of years has been shown to be wrong, then doesn't it make sense for us to change our mind?If you mean, gravity could stop working or something preposterous like that, then you're wrong. For one thing, evolution has nothing to say about any of that. For another, if things could turn on and off like that, then our science would be completely wrong, far from being a necessary outcome. You seem to have little to no idea what science is and how methodical naturalism works.

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. Are you asking for proof that these laws exist? Are you asking how these laws would come to exist in the first place? I'm guessing you mean the second, in which case, they're simply properties of the universe. Another universe may have occurred with vastly different laws and mechanics, but we happen to live in a universe that has these laws. I'm not sure why you need a "why", it's a "just is" type thing. All the evidence we have points to evolution. All the evidence we have points to an old earth and a vastly older universe. All the evidence we have points to no supernatural meddling in the universe. All the evidence we have points to an indifferent universe that operates according to physical laws and doesn't care one whit if you live, die, succeed, or suffer. If you disbelieve any of these things and argue that there is a God who affects things in the universe, that the earth is young, that life was created as is...then God made up evidence for us to find so as to deceive us.

I agree. Apologetics, however, seemed to be saying that natural laws couldn't happen without God, meaning the natural laws were themselves inconsistent with science.

Well, we both took it two different ways, I guess Apologetics is the one who must clear this up.