Although statistics don't determine reality, it is important to consider that both biological evolution and The Big Bang theory (and the idea of a self-made universe) are extremely statistically unlikely (by hundreds of thousands of degrees of magnitude).  This offers overwhelming reason to look into simpler alternatives (instead of even more contrived alternatives, such as the theory of multiple universes, which can be eliminated since it is unnecessary [Occam's razor]).

It is also much more likely that our complex and finite universe did not form from material that is simpler and finite, but from the energy of a complex and infinite being.

Most people have faith in evolution even though they don't know how to defend it--for example, probably don't know how what could cause a singularity to explode (for the big bang to be possible) or what is required for biogenesis (life from non-life) to occur.

New experiments with bacteria show that genetic mutations can only create six degrees of separation, wherein the the ability to adapt further is continually reduced, then eliminated at the sixth mutation. This experiment was whitewashed by the scientists, who publicly stated that the experiment simply "failed to produce a mutant" and that an infinite number of tests would have to be done in order to falsify the possibility of cellular evolution--this position is a poor interpretation of the data, because the idea of "infinite experiments" flies in the face of the scientific method, and shows by way of contrast an "infinite" degree of faith in biological evolution though the face value result of the experiment tends to falsify the idea of evolution as a law (notice that evolution may be the longest lasting of all scientific theories that have been taught without ever being able to be proven as scientific law).

Genetic mutations creating species that can't reproduce is a negative effect of mutation, not creation of new species. Even some humans can't reproduce, that doesn't mean they are a different species.

Evolutionary textbooks promote known falsehoods to convince people of the theory--for example, textbooks still teach "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" (Ernst Haeckel's doctored drawings trying to show a fetus looking like different animals at different stages of development); Piltdown Man; Lucy; "missing links" that have turned out to match skull shapes of modern humans; and many other scientifically-known hoaxes or theories with racist origins.

Non-fraudulent finds which scientists call "missing links" are likely to be a species extinct ape, and there is no logical need to think otherwise.

Christians do not have to deny natural selection (adaptation without changing species) to deny biogenesis (life from non-life) or deny evolution of new species.

If evolution where true, there would be more fossils of transitional species than actual complete species.

Evolution is self-defeating, because if survival of the fittest (which is a generalization not a universal truth) were consistent, transitional species would be wiped out by better-adapted fully-formed species.

Reproduction is an extremely difficult problem for evolution. Not only is the process of reproduction geared toward creating species of the same kind and often fails when far-reaching mutations occur; but also when a species "evolved" the new creature would have to find another of it's kind, in the same area, that evolved the same way, with the same new DNA structure.

Belief that scientific explanations will eventually eliminate the need for a "God of the gaps" is evidence that a person has blind faith in philosophical materialism (belief that the only reality is the physical) and modern scientific theories, which is a type of faith that the Bible does not require (see Reasons to Trust the God of the Bible).