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.
"Amazing! But the supposed speculative historicity of Jesus combined with the Christ of theology, seeing ..."

Will The Real Jesus Please Stand ..."
"I imagine the early church in Acts looked a lot like this though... kinda makes ..."

Scam artist preacher David E. Taylor ..."
"What's funny is that even this Christian website still recognizes him as a "pastor." The ..."

Scam artist preacher David E. Taylor ..."
"Well of course if you choose to compare “I have faith that I own a ..."

Why false equivalence arguments mean religion ..."

Browse Our Archives

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment