(1) An important topic in any discussion of Darwinian evolution is the major problem of blunders, frauds, and forgeries made by evolutionists. How can anyone consider Darwinian evolution to be TRUE if it is characterized by frauds? Would you purchase an insurance policy if the company has a record of frauds? No, but many people accept Darwinian evolution despite its connection with frauds and forgeries.
(2) Question 4: Does the Miller-Urey experiment prove that LIFE can be built by natural process?
(3) No, the conclusions drawn from the Miller-Urey experiment are no longer considered RELEVANT by the scientific community. In fact, the experiment has been CRITICIZED FOR UNREALISTIC ASSUMPTIONS about early earth atmospherical conditions, methodological FLAWS, and LIMITED APPLICABILITY to the actual origin of life. When it comes to the Miller-Urey experiment things continue to go WRONG and its significance for the origin-of-life question is now perceived as an INVALID EXPERIMENT and IRRELEVANT in terms of justifying the origin of life. The scientific CONSENSUS VIEW of early earth’s atmospheric constituents has CHANGED since the 1950s.
(4) Question 5: Do all scientists accept Darwin’s theory of evolution at the cellular level?
(5) At present, the scientific mainstream accepts evolutionary mechanisms as the BEST-SUPPORTED EXPLANATION for the diversity and complexity of life, while recognizing that IMPORTANT QUESTIONS — especially concerning the origin of life and the detailed evolutionary history of some molecular systems — REMAIN ACTIVE AREAS of investigation. The disagreement is therefore not over whether cells are extraordinarily complex (they are), but over whether known evolutionary mechanisms are SUFFICIENT TO EXPLAIN how that complexity arose.
(6) Question 6. Do the changes in finch beaks, or the changes due to selective breeding, prove Darwin’s theory of evolution?
(7) Finch beaks changing is only microevolution which all agree is true. Selective breeding is not “environmental natural factors” as required by Darwin’s theory. Darwin’s theory includes macroevolution where species lead to new species. This has never been observed.
(8) Question 7. Does the fossil record support Darwin’s theory of evolution?
(9) No, Darwin predicted that IF his theory were correct, there should be evidence that simple life forms gradually developed into more and more complex organisms.
Paleontologists generally state that the fossil record does NOT SUPPORT Darwin’s theory in 2 major ways:
(a) Animal types tend to appear SUDDENLY (as in the Cambrian Explosion) not gradually, as Darwin predicted. Therefore, each animal type is missing its link to its former ancestor.
(b) Animals tend to remain UNCHANGED throughout their time on earth (NOT SLOWLY DEVELOPING into new forms as Darwin predicted).
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör
Joe Mott. Innehållet i podden är skapat av Joe Mott och inte av,
eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.