[kanawa]

the article states

"These scientists do not reject the general idea of evolution,
but they admitted that the current theory based on Darwin is falling apart

The title
New PragerU Video Shows 2 Scientific Reasons to Doubt Evolution
given to the article is inaccurate.

[Heartlander]

The very first sentence of the article states, On Monday, PragerU released a video giving two solid scientific reasons to doubt the Darwinian theory of evolution.. Moreover, I believe the title of the article was taking for granted that it is Darwinian evolution being discussed.

Although, it could just be a problem of defining evolution – it is both contradictory and vague:

It allows for convergent evolution (statistically impossible), stagnant evolution (you mean to tell me that for 500 million years there could be no improvement to the horseshoe crab?), punctuated evolution (everything stays the same for a real long time and then evolution kicks into high gear and it all happens so fast there’s no record of it having happened at all), neutral evolution (the blueprints for marvelously useful structures get created in unexpressed DNA by random shuffling, until one day voila, the gene is turned on and the structure appears fully formed). In evolution anything goes and contradictions live in happy harmony with one another. This is science? It’s not even a sound religion.
- Laszlo Bencze

“Given enough time, luck can happen” is not a scientific theory. To quote Behe, Luck is metaphysical speculation; scientific explanations invoke causes.