Disproving Evolution – Part 29 – Summary of Errors

Disproving Evolution – Part 29 – Summary of Errors July 30, 2015

[Index of series posts]

Continuing the rebuttal of the article,  “9 Scientific Facts Prove that “The Theory of Evolution” is wrong.

I kept a list of the (major) errors/misconceptions the author made.

  • No, scientific theories do not graduate into scientific laws.
  • No, scientific laws do not have to be correct in 100% of all circumstances.
  • No, there is no demonstrated “DNA limit”.
  • There can be more than one variable to a trait, and the author doesn’t get to choose which one matters most. There may be another advantage/disadvantage that modifies the survival rate more than the arbitrarily chosen one.
  • Not everything is accessible to evolution. Requiring reflective skin to arise from natural selection may be like requiring deer to evolve cloaking devices.
  • Evolution is not an intelligent engineer. It doesn’t know anything. Those traits that increase survival-to-reproduction are selected for… even if the solutions aren’t readily obvious or “smart” to humans.
  • No, the Theory of Evolution is not contingent on abiogenesis (the naturalistic start to life).
  • No, evolution does not say it could produce a cat from a dog.
  • Yes, we’ve observed speciation.
  • No, Darwin didn’t invent the concept of evolution.
  • No, children are not being taught that evolution is like infinite monkeys at typewriters.
  • No, natural selection does not operate by randomizing the entire genome each generation.
  • “Cats” and “dogs” don’t exist in nature. That’s a category humans invented to label lineages in their current state, at the time humans discovered them. The understanding of the labels change over time too.
  • There’s more to evolution than natural selection, such as group selection, artificial selection, sexual selection, etc.
  • No, natural selection does not necessarily produce larger, faster, or stronger traits.
  • All forms of all species that have ever existed at any point are “transitional”.
  • No, the ancestors of birds didn’t have “half wings” or “wing stubs”.
  • No, natural selection does not automatically select the “most adaptive” member of a species, and kill off the “weakest” member.
  • Vestigial or half-sized traits are not automatically advantageous or disadvantageous. Environment matters.
  • No, wings didn’t evolve into arms. Arms evolved into wings.
  • No, arms didn’t evolve because a species “got tired of carrying around useless wings” and became a new species.
  • No, evolution doesn’t go out of its way to work towards a goal.
  • No, fish didn’t “wiggle out of the sea” and start breathing air, to become land creatures.
  • No, whales are not fish.
  • Yes, gills can process air… just badly.
  • No, lungs did not evolve from gills. Fish can independently evolve lungs… and did so before going onto land.
  • Yes, dinosaurs had precursor ancestors. They didn’t suddenly appear.
  • Failing to find transitional fossils in a specific small tract of land doesn’t disprove natural selection.
  • No, someone noticing an issue on an artificially reconstructed mockup skeleton in a museum doesn’t disprove evolution.
  • No, a mistake is not automatically a lie.
  • No, scientists don’t think that simply having a lot of species proves evolution.
  • No, not having a “missing link” doesn’t disprove evolution.
  • No, scientists don’t think that lining up similar skulls proves evolution. They’re able to line up the skulls because their lineage is independently verified.
  • No, scientists aren’t coming up with “make-believe creatures” to fill in the gaps in the evolutionary tree.
  • No, a transitional fossil isn’t debunked because it’s not 100% identical to either endpoint.
  • Yes, we’ve discovered plenty of “missing links”.
  • No, evolution doesn’t require all life to be constantly changing all the time.
  • Population genetics keep a population’s forms mostly averaged. That’s why a population’s individual forms don’t’ wildly vary.
  • No, the fossil record is not evidence that creatures popped into existence out of nothing.
  • No, finding new fossils doesn’t disprove evolution because we now have more gaps in the record. That means it’s more complete.
  • No, Punctuated Equilibrium does not disprove evolution.
  • No, coevolution does not disprove evolution.
  • No, all the “missing links” were not disproven.
  • Science doesn’t operate on proofs. It operates on the evidence.
  • No, cherry picking exceptions does not disprove the regular pattern/rule.
  • No, modern day seals do not prove Tiktaalik is a fraud (somehow).
  • No, a single pair of a species isn’t going to start a new evolutionary branch.
  • All evolutionary branches are both “inferior” and “superior”, by author’s definition.
  • No, evolution doesn’t produce an entire branch with “inferior” traits
  • Not all creatures fossilize. Fossilization is rare.
  • Yes, the fossil record is full of “dead branches”… most all of it, actually.
  • No, abiogenesis doesn’t say that lightning struck a pond and created the first cells.
  • No, the Theory of Evolution does not say that life was formed from inorganic matter.
  • “Have not” is not equivalent to “Can not”
  • No, abiogenesis is not like junkyard pieces blowing in the wind to form a 747.
  • No, Intelligent design is not “obvious” merely because you think so.
  • No, abiogenesis is not completely random.
  • No, abiogenesis is not an assertion that life started “by random chance”, or that it was an “accident”.
  • No, modern biochemistry is not the same as abiogenesis’s primitive biochemistry.
  • Complexity implies nature’s hand more than an intelligence.
  • No, Darwin did not think that zebras were “lower” than horses.
  • No, scientists have not “conclusively proven” that “80% of life could not have evolved from a predecessor
  • Yes, plants and animals are related.
  • Yes, plants and animals can share DNA sequences, because they’re related.
  • No, the conclusion, that the bacterial flagellum is intelligently designed, is not “obvious”.
  • No, individual creatures cannot evolve.
  • No, individual creature’s adaption to the environment is not passed down to the next generation, and is not part of evolutionary theory.
  • No, sperm and eggs do not disprove evolution.
  • No, evolution does not violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
  • No, order doesn’t always move towards disorder. It can be locally reversed.
  • No, the fact that extinction happens doesn’t mean evolution doesn’t happen.
  • No, All lifes’ genes aren’t degrading, and not “improving”. Species continue to adapt to their environments and speciate.
  • Yes, chromosome count can change; and without major addition/subtraction of genetic code.
  • No, chromosome count doesn’t strictly need to match for reproduction.
  • No, speciation doesn’t occur through different species trying to reproduce.
  • No, horses and donkeys producing sterile offspring does not disprove evolution.
  • No, the origins of matter have nothing to do with whether evolution is true or not.

Browse Our Archives