"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact." Dr. T. N. Tahmisian of the Atomic Energy Commission

"Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists not because it has been observed to occur or is supported by logically coherent arguments, but because...no alternative explanation is credible.
Whilst the fact of evolution is accepted by every biologist, the mode in which it has occurred and the mechanism by which it has been brought about are still disputable.  ...the theory of evolution itself is a theory universally accepted not because it can be proved by logical coherent evidence to be true but because the only alternative is special creation, which is clearly incredible." D.M.S. Watson, Evolutionist

In other words, he would rather believe in an idea that has no credible science to back it up than to believe in Creator Lord Jesus.

Sorry synthetic life doesn't count! synthetic-not of natural origin;artificial or contrived. If you wan't to build your own sandbox you have to make your own sand,you can't use my sand.It's a simple concept really! The cell is the basic unit of life.Within the cell is DNA. In the DNA is digital information.Where does information come from? Information comes from an intelligent mind and that intelligent mind is the Creator God.

Romans 1:18-20 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

http://www.bible-prophecy-today.com/2010/05/has-man-created-life.html#axzz0p3TXl900

Don't see that this helps Lee in his side of the debate. While it lends itself to being a statement that evolution is not totally factual. The statement also can be used to the same extent for intelligent design. There is not one iota of fact that a God created everything.  Only a theory stated by man.
Ironic that the opposite side of the coin is a theory stated by man.  Maybe the common ground here is that both are a theory (belief) stated by men.  Belief as we know is the acceptance of something that cannot be proven.

Anxiety - thanks for the link, it also lends toward intelligent design in that the creation of a life form with a DNA that was made by someone else then a God (mankind) exists.  I find that it is a totally plausible  theory that life as we know it could have been created elsewhere and then inserted into this universe as an experiment by a higher life form.  I have heard that the UF science class has proven that microbes from earth could and possibly did reach Mars on the last space mission.  Thereby in the future we may find life on Mars that would be identical to ours, not necessarily a native Martian life. 

Does this negate the  intelligent design theory, no, just places it into another quadrant of possibilities.  There may be a God that exists, but that our DNA was started on another planet and then transferred here.  Opens the door for the Garden of Eden to be located outside of the earth. 

We may be on track to demonstrate how the bible stories have some truth in it that can be proven scientifically and that the story would fit within the confines of the understanding of humans at that time in their evolution.

That is simply not the case, Lee. I can understand someone believing in God as a creator regardless of the evidence presented by scientific studies, but there is an overwhelming degree of evidence for evolution. So much in fact, that even the Catholic church recognizes it as a truism.

I think it would be more honest for you to say, "There is a great degree of evidence in support of evolution presented from different scientific fields ranging anywhere from biology to geology, however, regardless of this evidence I still believe in a creator."

I think the problem some people of faith have with Science is a general fear of being proven wrong. The scientific method is not a method of deception. If you actually took the time to read the scientific findings and massive empirically based evidence for when life started, and the diversity of life at different eras, you might have a different perspective. If you've already done this, then I suspect you've arrived at the point of Moore's paradox ("It's raining outside but I don't believe it is.")

The idea of choosing science as a "God" is nonsensical. It's a method, not a deity.

If you think science supports that the earth is ~6000 years old, then there's no use in arguing -- you've arrived at stubborn delusion.