Fallacies of evolution
1: in spite of the intense pressure generated by artificial selection (eliminating any parent not answering the criteria of choice) over a whole millennia, no new species are born. A comparative study of sera hemoglobins, blood proteins, interfertility, etc., proves that the strains remain within the same specific definition. This is not a matter of opinion or subjective classification, but a measurable reality. The fact is that selection gives tangible form to and gathers together all the varieties a genome is capable of producing, but does not constitute an innovative evolutionary process.- Pierre grasse: famous french zoologist
2:Geologist discovered species, and groups of species that appeared suddenly rather than at the end of a chain of evolutionary links.
3:"Cambrian explosion" of around 600 million years ago. Nearly all the animal phyla appear in the rocks of this period, without a trace of the evolutionary ancestors that darwinist require.
4: The fossil record shows a consistent pattern of sudden appearance followed by stasis, life's History is more of a story of variation around a set of basic designs than one of accumulating improvement.
5: Extinction has been predominantly by catastrophe rather than gradual obsolescence.
6: If it is possible for a single ancestral species to change by natural processes into such different forms as a shark, a frog, a penguin, and a monkey, then laboratory science should be able to discover the mechanism of change.
7: Some experts in good standing doubt,say that A. Afarensis and A. Africanus were really distinct species, and many deny that there ever was such a species as homo habilis.
8: The "mitochondrial eve" theory asserts that modern humans emerged from Africa less than 200,000 years ago. If that hypothesis is accepted, then all the homo erectus fragments found outside of Africa are necessarily outside the ancestral chain, because they are older than 200,000.(which disproves humans sharing common ancestry with apes.)
9: Solly Zuckerman, one of britian's most influential scientist and a leading primate expert who boldly regarded much of the fossil evidence as fake. Zuckerman subjected the Australopithecus to years of intricate "biometric" testing, and concluded that "the anatomical basis for the claim that they walked and ran upright like man is so much more flimsy than the evidence which points to the conclusion that their gait was some variant of what one sees in subhuman primates, that It remains unacceptable". Despite his believe in evolution, he said this
10: Science says that the three bacterial kingdoms evolved from a common ancestor. archaebacteria is said to be the oldest and survived harsh environments. That might suggest that archaebacteria are ancestral to eurobacteria, but the two bacterial kingdoms are so fundamentaly different from each other that neither could have evolved from each other. the molecular evidence adds further doubt, because of the previously explained phenomenon of molecular equidistance.(archaebacteria is recently discovered) -Niles eldridge: paleontologist
11: If molecular evolution occurred at clock-like rates it must have been the product of regularly-occurring mutations that were not greatly affected by the environmental conditions that are presumed to have rapid change and lengthy stasis in he phenotypes. Therefore this contradicts natural selection. -Mootoo kimura: Japanese biologist
12: Life seems to have existed in cellular form nearly four billion Years ago, perhaps as soon as the earth had sufficiently cooled. That means that the emergence of the first self-replicating molecules, and the subsequent evolution of all the machinery of the cell, had to occur within a brief period of geological time. This is highly unlikely.-Carl Sagan: cosmologist
13: A living organism emerged by chance from a prebiotic soup is about as likely as that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.-Fred Hoyle: chemist
14: Closely examined, whether historically or in the contemporary laboratory, [normal science] seems an attempt to force nature into the preformed and relatively inflexible box that the paradigm supplies. No part of the aim of normal science is to call forth new sorts of
phenomena; indeed those that will not fit the box are often not seen at all. Nor do scientists aim to invent new theories, and they are often intolerant of the theories invented by others. Instead, normal scientific research is directed to the articulation of those phenomena and theories that the paradigm already supplies.-Thomas Kuhn: American physicist and philosopher
My source is a book written by a harvard graduate, please check it out. It's called "Darwin on Trial"
1: in spite of the intense pressure generated by artificial selection (eliminating any parent not answering the criteria of choice) over a whole millennia, no new species are born. A comparative study of sera hemoglobins, blood proteins, interfertility, etc., proves that the strains remain within the same specific definition. This is not a matter of opinion or subjective classification, but a measurable reality. The fact is that selection gives tangible form to and gathers together all the varieties a genome is capable of producing, but does not constitute an innovative evolutionary process.- Pierre grasse: famous french zoologist
2:Geologist discovered species, and groups of species that appeared suddenly rather than at the end of a chain of evolutionary links.
3:"Cambrian explosion" of around 600 million years ago. Nearly all the animal phyla appear in the rocks of this period, without a trace of the evolutionary ancestors that darwinist require.
4: The fossil record shows a consistent pattern of sudden appearance followed by stasis, life's History is more of a story of variation around a set of basic designs than one of accumulating improvement.
5: Extinction has been predominantly by catastrophe rather than gradual obsolescence.
6: If it is possible for a single ancestral species to change by natural processes into such different forms as a shark, a frog, a penguin, and a monkey, then laboratory science should be able to discover the mechanism of change.
7: Some experts in good standing doubt,say that A. Afarensis and A. Africanus were really distinct species, and many deny that there ever was such a species as homo habilis.
8: The "mitochondrial eve" theory asserts that modern humans emerged from Africa less than 200,000 years ago. If that hypothesis is accepted, then all the homo erectus fragments found outside of Africa are necessarily outside the ancestral chain, because they are older than 200,000.(which disproves humans sharing common ancestry with apes.)
9: Solly Zuckerman, one of britian's most influential scientist and a leading primate expert who boldly regarded much of the fossil evidence as fake. Zuckerman subjected the Australopithecus to years of intricate "biometric" testing, and concluded that "the anatomical basis for the claim that they walked and ran upright like man is so much more flimsy than the evidence which points to the conclusion that their gait was some variant of what one sees in subhuman primates, that It remains unacceptable". Despite his believe in evolution, he said this
10: Science says that the three bacterial kingdoms evolved from a common ancestor. archaebacteria is said to be the oldest and survived harsh environments. That might suggest that archaebacteria are ancestral to eurobacteria, but the two bacterial kingdoms are so fundamentaly different from each other that neither could have evolved from each other. the molecular evidence adds further doubt, because of the previously explained phenomenon of molecular equidistance.(archaebacteria is recently discovered) -Niles eldridge: paleontologist
11: If molecular evolution occurred at clock-like rates it must have been the product of regularly-occurring mutations that were not greatly affected by the environmental conditions that are presumed to have rapid change and lengthy stasis in he phenotypes. Therefore this contradicts natural selection. -Mootoo kimura: Japanese biologist
12: Life seems to have existed in cellular form nearly four billion Years ago, perhaps as soon as the earth had sufficiently cooled. That means that the emergence of the first self-replicating molecules, and the subsequent evolution of all the machinery of the cell, had to occur within a brief period of geological time. This is highly unlikely.-Carl Sagan: cosmologist
13: A living organism emerged by chance from a prebiotic soup is about as likely as that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.-Fred Hoyle: chemist
14: Closely examined, whether historically or in the contemporary laboratory, [normal science] seems an attempt to force nature into the preformed and relatively inflexible box that the paradigm supplies. No part of the aim of normal science is to call forth new sorts of
phenomena; indeed those that will not fit the box are often not seen at all. Nor do scientists aim to invent new theories, and they are often intolerant of the theories invented by others. Instead, normal scientific research is directed to the articulation of those phenomena and theories that the paradigm already supplies.-Thomas Kuhn: American physicist and philosopher
My source is a book written by a harvard graduate, please check it out. It's called "Darwin on Trial"