|email - January 2009|
Alice wants to know the best arguments against the theory of evolution.
Occasionally we get a question similar to Alice’s.
Hello Science Against Evolution,
I am conducting a research series. I would like to know a few things. What are the TOP arguments against evolution considering the modern evidence?
I appreciate if you get back to me. Hopefully, you guys still accept emails.
It is a difficult question to answer. It’s like trying to answer, “What are the top arguments against Santa Claus?” Is the best argument that reindeer can’t fly? Or the speed he would have to fly to visit every house? Or the required size and weight of his sleigh? Or the difficulty of going back up the chimney? It is difficult, and pointless, to assign importance to each of these arguments.
What is the best argument against evolution? Is it the fact that chemicals don’t organize themselves into living things through natural processes? Or is it that a lens, cornea, and optic nerve can’t accidentally assemble themselves into a functioning vision system? Or is it that image processing software wouldn’t accidentally arise in the brain to make use of the electrical signals from that vision system? Or is it that muscles wouldn’t accidentally attach themselves to the eyeball and lens, so that a feedback and control system could accidentally arise that aims the eyeball and focuses the lens? Or is it that an egg-laying reptile wouldn’t accidentally develop a womb, and mammary glands which secrete milk only after offspring exit that womb?
The evolutionary fable has even more ridiculous parts to it than the Santa Claus fable; and yet both are widely believed.
The real question is not, “What is the best argument against evolution?” One needs to be able to answer the question, “What is the best argument in favor of evolution?” This is where evolutionists come up short.
Their best argument is, “We are here, so we must have evolved.” That answer isn’t any better than, “There were presents under the tree on December 25, so Santa must have come.” Yes, there were presents under the tree, but the presents could have been placed there by someone other than Santa. Yes, we are here, but we might have gotten here by some process other than evolution.
So, the real answer to Alice’s question is, “The best argument against the theory of evolution is the inability of evolutionists to come up with good evidence in favor of the theory of evolution.”
The January 2009 issue of Scientific American is a good example. They tried really hard to present a good case for evolution, and it fell flat. In our feature article this month we’ve only started examining their feeble attempt to make evolution scientifically tenable. We don’t want to spoil our own thunder, but we have to say that next month we will see that the rest of the issue doesn’t fare any better. You will just have to wait for it.
|Quick links to|
|Science Against Evolution
|Back issues of
of the Month