Creationists will tell you there is no scientific basis for Evolution, and that Atheistic scientists only want to disprove the Bible. Scientists will tell you that Evolution supports itself through the facts, and Creationists have their heads in the sand.
In truth, both sides have valid points. People on both sides appear close-minded about any ideas or evidence outside of their comfort zone. This article may shed some light on the Theory of Evolution for people who either don't understand, or have incomplete information about how theories actually work.
Here is one example we all can relate to: gravity. Gravity is still a theory, not a fact. Some of the effects of gravity are observable facts, and these we call Laws; Isaac Newton set these Laws down in the 17th century, and proposed a theory around them. However, gravity is still a theory because we don't know all of the effects or causes of gravity entirely. This is proved by the fact that Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity, proposed in the 1920's, has two theories: Special Relativity and General Relativity. All three theories concern gravity and all have proven Laws at work. However, science is only beginning to scratch the surface of these theories.
Science takes demonstratable, repeatable, actions and reactions, and calls them Laws. One of Newton's Laws of motion states that "An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force." This is true and repeatable. Drop an orange on the floor. Continue to drop it, as many times as it takes to convince you that it will continue to hit the floor.
However, that is not the end of what gravity does. Therefore, we need explanations for why other observations happen as they do either according to the Laws set down or according to their own laws. Now you have a working theory concerning gravity so long as everything within it continues to act according to that theory. If something changes, you write a new theory to include those observations.
Having now laid a frame of reference about what a theory is, we can move on to the question of Evolution.
The theory of Evolution is not one of organisms deciding they would be better off as this or that organism; or a hodge-podge of mere accidents resulting in the order presently enjoyed out of the previous chaos. Evolution begins with an event scientists call "The Big-Bang". The accuracy of the big bang is somewhat questionable perhaps, although the universe is expanding, and that would be a logical assertion for why.
Now we move on to the formation of planets and solar systems. Where is the problem in stating that a planet coalesces into being from materials around it? If there is a sufficiently dense material like iron, and it is spinning, there would be a gravitational force attached to it that would then attract nearby materials into its gravitational sphere. Like a magnet attracting iron particles some distance away from it. We need to remember that untold thousands of billions of planets have already formed in our galaxy, and are still forming. In order to get a better picture of this we need to visualize our area of space as it was when it was forming, not as we see it now.
It doesn't take much imagination for our iron core to be spinning, most everything we see in our solar system and beyond is spinning to one degree or another. From there, little imagination is required to make a planet. Iron is one of the most prevalent materials in the world, and apparently in our galaxy. Meteorites, Comets and Asteroids all have concentrations of it, sometimes very high concentrations. Therefore, an iron core for a planet is definitely not outside of probability.
Once we have the planets, whether they are gas giants with a relatively small area of actual solidity or planets like the earth that are all solid with the exception of water, it is very easy to envision them coming across one another and forming orbits.
Saturn has 46 known moons, so far. Some are little more than asteroid-like rocks, others are potential planets with life giving water. If we can picture two or three planets moving within space and meeting one another, then visualizing the effects of gravity and relative speed being even somewhat correct, we can then have our developing solar system revolving around one another. All that is necessary then is for them to come into sufficiently close contact with a star, the sun.
Planets establishing orbits around the sun, according to relative speed and mass, means that some planets or moons will probably slam into one another, creating more moons or perhaps an asteroid belt like the one in our solar system. Remnants of the planets will then descend into the atmospheres of other planets, and contribute their mass and contents into their resources, like the comet that slammed into Jupiter in 1994.
