First, to fend off e-mails from the clueless: there's microevolution--a fact, which you can easily replicate with garden plants or small short-lived animals--and there's macroevolution, a religious belief for which the "factual" support happens to have been constructed to support the theory. Carbon dating works if you accept the arrangement of the "fossil record" that was constructed to promote the theory of macroevolution, which works if you accept carbon dating.
I think, from a scientific point of view, macroevolution has exactly as much to recommend it as the alternative intelligent-design theory. Which is to say: I don't think either can be studied or discussed scientifically. Believe whichever one fits into your world view, teach it to your children, but please don't call it science. Science is the study of facts that can be observed and replicated. Nobody has yet found a way to replicate either macroevolution or intelligent design.
Robert O. Adair has specialized in satires that ridicule evolution, and although I think he's done better ones than the one I found in the e-mail today, I want to share this chuckle with everyone: