The last section of the webpage “weaknesses of evolution” is some helpful tips from creationists about how to prevent misunderstandings.
Does not knowing exactly how something happened imply that it didn’t happen?
Creationists are constantly harping on the difference between “micro-evolution” and “macro-evolution”. ‘Micro’ being the small changes within a population that is readily observable in nature and the lab. ‘Macro’ being the larger changes between higher taxonomic levels. Personally, I greatly dislike this artificial distinction. There is evolution.
Bull cookies. Creationists have been claiming this for decades. Very often, they will also talk about how mutations damage genes…
Creationists complain when science can’t do in 20 minutes what it takes nature millions of years to do. Induced mutations…
We’ve finished talking about fossils and now we move to ‘presently observed nature weaknesses’ (I’m not even going to comment on the exceedingly poor wording.). What the Texas creationists have done is set up a system where each bit of evidence for evolution is considered individually and dismissed. Then, they claim that the entire theory has problems. As we shall see here, this causes them some problems.
This is another classic. It’s been around for decades, if not hundreds of years. Where are the transitional fossils?
With this part of our exploration of the ‘weaknesses of evolution‘ we move from origins of life into the fossil…
Some things are constants. Death, taxes, and southern states trying to pass religious bills in the name of education. The latest is from Oklahoma and it’s not even pretneding to have the students’ best interest at heart.
In our second part of the “Scientific Weaknesses of Evolution” discussion, we’re going to talk about this one
The high probability of breakdown by hydrolysis of amino acid chains if they were to form in the first place.