By now most of us have seen the Darwin fish, the Christian fish symbol modified by putting Darwin's name in the place of Jesus, and adding legs. What does it say about evolution and creation, what does it say about Biblical accuracy and what does it really say about the people who design it and display it?
Question: what was the actual date that molecules to man was proven by using the scientific method?
Examine some of the ideas that are central to evolution that are based on logical errors and fallacies, such as similarity being evidence of ancestral relationships, spontaneous generation of information and the use of consensus, authority and legal maneuvers to bolster the theory.
Evolution has a probability problem, so it needs an infinite improbability drive. How do you explain all the improbable events that would have to take place for evolution to be a fact?
Find out the Darwinist's answer to irreducible complexity.
When things look similar and it is obvious that the similarity could not come from a direct evolutionary ancestral relationship, evolutionists often invoke convergence. Examples of this are fins in fish and whales, or wings in bats and birds. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but it's not a duck, it's probably another case of convergent evolution.
In contrast to the obvious design in nature, no one has observed or ever could observe macro-evolutionary change. The story of evolution is a collection of scientific sounding fiction and speculation held together by consensus and authority. The line that divides evolution's believers from its doubters is philosophical not scientific.
THE EVOLUTION MYTH
Picture the story of evolution like a chain. Each link in the chain should be forged by science. Each part of the story that cannot be supported by science is considered a "missing link." How much science is really missing from the story of evolution?
