Well, you can't.
You can't actually argue with someone who endorses so-called "Creation Science," because such a person does not, or will not debate about scientific facts.
With the advent of "non-reality-based" beliefs, which first received official imprimatur in the George W. Bush Administration, it's become acceptable for reactionaries to take refuge in their "own" data, and abandon the common ground of understanding.
Rejecting Wikipedia, for example, as too "liberal" --which means too reliant upon general information which contradicts the cherished fantasies of so-called conservatives, the devotees of the far right can resort to... "Conservapedia."
There they may achieve reassurance by reading, for example, that Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is in error.
Why? Because "It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism."
Sadly, this is no joke. If only it were.
As a counterexample to Relativity, the authors cite John 4: 46-54, the New Testament account of how Jesus was able to heal a child from a distance instantaneously (faster than light?).
So it's useless to try to defend to those people the understanding, however hard and heroically achieved, of any aspect of human knowledge.
It's a cultural and political brand that has come to this-- the negation of humanity's most admirable achivement-- true enlightenment about the actual, verifiable nature of the physical world-- by the apostles of greed and selfishness.
The enormous effort made to achieve scientific results, spanning more than one human lifetime, counts with the Jesus-walloper very little.
A mind that is unwilling to admit education, after all, can never receive it.
Yes, you can't convince a Creationist-- you can't even get such a person even to entertain any hypothesis outside the limitations of cherished dogma.
But there is one way to prosecute an argument which may have the much-desired result of getting a true believer to break off and leave you alone, maybe the most you can expect.
Perhaps it may, if one can be hopeful, even plant a fertile seed of doubt.
And this way is to put the matter to the Creationist on his own turf-- the Bible.
It's a thankless task, since these days nobody likes to talk about religion or the Bible, and Creationists in particular tend to be mulishly obstinate by nature.
Still, in the second part of this article, I will outline how this may be done.
[Creation of Adam and Eve via Shutterstock.com]