“One cannot take a known pattern of life, claim that pattern as a prediction of evolution, and then use the fact the pattern fits the prediction as evidence for the truth of evolution. To be of evidentiary value, the predictions must derive from the hypothesis itself, not be read back into the hypothesis from present knowledge.”
http://www.trueorigin.org/theobald1d.asp
Thanks, Cottshop! I've been reading through that 29+ evidences on Talk.O at someone's suggestion. So far I haven't found anything convincing, but I'm sure the critique will be helpful. Thanks!
-Jesse
Also type ‘homology’ into hte search area on that site- you’ll find other talks about why homology can’t be concidered proofs for Macroevoltuion