[usconservative]

Since evolution stands on literally millions of data points,

Almost all of which are really assumptions

...with numerous successful predictions under its belt,

With many well published flaws that debunk evolution ...

and no significant data/evidence led dissent about its truth within the worldwide scientific community for more than a century

Now that's absolutely incorrect! You present these thesis as fact, when the reality is many of evolution's own proponents have decided that the evidence does not support evolution, and that too many assumptions and mathematical errors have been made over time to consider the theory of evolution valid.

Every time a scientist decides evolution is bunk, you in the "darwin community" turn on them, deride them, then pretend they don't exist.

Let me see, who was the prominent scientist who was for evolution until he published an article in June of 2004 that debunked Darwin?

You're free to believe what you like, however false and unproven it is. The facts are, the more science looks at the "new earth" theory, the "old earth" theory gets debunked and the Bible is proven correct.

[Coyoteman]

The facts are, the more science looks at the "new earth" theory, the "old earth" theory gets debunked and the Bible is proven correct.

You mean "new earth" as?

...in the seventeenth century [1644], in his great work, Dr. John Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, and one of the most eminent Hebrew scholars of his time, declared, as the result of his most profound and exhaustive study of the Scriptures, that "heaven and earth, centre and circumference, were created all together, in the same instant, and clouds full of water," and that "this work took place and man was created by the Trinity on October 23, 4004 B.C., at nine o'clock in the morning."

Andrew D. White, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (D. Appleton and Co., 1897, p. 9).

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/ussher.htm

How do you account for the bristlecone pine tree-ring sequence which can be counted back some 11,000+ years? Or the ice-core and glacial varves which go much older?

[Thatcherite]

Festival of ignorance placemarker.

[Quark2005]

The facts are, the more science looks at the "new earth" theory, the "old earth" theory gets debunked and the Bible is proven correct.

What peer-reviewed journal did this sudden revolution in science get published in?

[VadeRetro]

Let me see, who was the prominent scientist who was for evolution until he published an article in June of 2004 that debunked Darwin?

I would expect to know that and I don't. I give up, in fact. Who?

[shuckmaster]

With many well published flaws that debunk evolution ...

I'm sure you don't mind refering us to one of these published flaws?

[Ichneumon]

[Since evolution stands on literally millions of data points,]

Almost all of which are really assumptions

Nope. Please do not post *YOUR* uninformed ASSUMPTION as if it were fact. You are clearly quite unfamiliar with the actual body of evidence. Go and learn something about evolutionary biology and the massive amount of evidence supporting it, then come back and try again.

With many well published flaws that debunk evolution ...

Uh huh. Sure. Look, over the past thirty years, I've read literally THOUSANDS of attempts by anti-evolutionists to present what they thought were "flaws that debunked evolution". Every one of them (let me repeat that -- EVERY one of them) has fallen flat on its face, usually due to the person being astoundingly clueless about what evolutionary biology actually says, or what the evidence for it actually is, or how the principles of physics, chemistry, mathematics, etc. actually work in practice.

But hey, feel free to give us *your* stab at it, let's see if you can be the first creationist to actually have the "silver bullet" against evolution he believes he does. I'm always open to looking at any good argument or evidence, if you actually have some. But the creationist track record is VERY poor in that regard.

For instance, make sure that the material you have which you think "debunks" evolution actually hasn't already been previously considered and itself DEBUNKED a thousand times over before you came along. Here's an abbreviated list of some of the flawed anti-evolution arguments that have already been found to be flawed:

Index to Creationist Claims

edited by Mark Isaak

Copyright © 2005
[Last update: 19 Aug 2005]

Introduction

CA: Philosophy and Theology

• CA000: Ethics
  • CA001. Evolution is the foundation of an immoral worldview.
    • CA001.1. Crime rates etc. have increased since evolution began to be taught.
  • CA002. Survival of the fittest implies might makes right.
    • CA002.1. Evolution leads to social Darwinism.
    • CA002.2. Marx admired and corresponded with Darwin.
  • CA005. Evolution is racist.
    • CA005.1. Darwin himself was racist.
    • CA005.2. Darwin's work refers to "preservation of favoured races".
    • CA005.3. T. H. Huxley was racist.
  • CA006. Evolution encourages eugenics.
    • CA006.1. Hitler based his views on Darwinism.
  • CA008. Evolution encourages promiscuity and lust.
  • CA009. Evolution teaches that we are animals and to behave as such.
  • CA010. Homosexuality receives approval from evolutionists.
  • CA012. Evolutionists are intellectual snobs.
  • CA040. Fairness demands evolution and creation be given equal time.
  • CA041. Teach the controversy.
    • CA041.1. Federal law (Santorum Amendment) supports teaching alternatives.
  • CA042. Biology can reasonably be taught without evolution.
  • CA045. Inherit the Wind is false propaganda.
  • (see also CH010: Creationism is good.)
• CA100-CA499: Epistemology
  • CA100: Foundation of Knowledge
    • CA100. Argument from incredulity
      • CA100.1. Evolution leaves lots of things unexplained.
    • CA110: Argument from Authority
      • CA110. Evolution will soon be widely rejected.
      • CA111. Many current scientists reject evolution.
        • CA111.1. Over 300 scientists express skepticism of Darwinism.
      • CA112. Many scientists find problems with evolution.
      • CA113. Quote mining
        • CA113.1. Darwin on evolution of the eye.
      • CA114. Many famous scientists were creationists.
        • CA114.1. Lord Kelvin was a creationist.
        • CA114.2. Linnaeus was a creationist.
        • CA114.10. Fabre was a creationist.
        • CA114.22. Louis Pasteur was a creationist.
        • CA114.28. Steno was a creationist.
      • CA118. Your arguments do not count because you are not qualified.
    • CA120. An evolved mind is fallible, its conclusions untrustworthy.
    • CA131. Darwin suffered from psychoneurosis.
  • CA200: Theory of Science
    • CA201. Evolution is only a theory.
    • CA202. Evolution has not been proved.
    • CA210. Evolution does not make predictions.
    • CA211. Evolution can not be falsified.
    • CA212. Evolution is ambiguously defined.
    • CA215. Evolution is a useless theory.
    • CA220. Evolution can not be replicated.
    • CA221. Were you there?
    • CA230. Interpreting evidence is not the same as observation.
      • CA230.1. Evolutionists interpret evidence on the basis of their preconceptions.
        • (see also CI402: Evolutionists refuse to see design.)
    • CA240. Ockham's Razor says the simplest explanation (creation) is preferred.
    • CA250. Scientific findings are always changing.
  • CA300-CA499: Scientific Method
    • CA301. Science is naturalistic. (see also CA601: Methodological naturalism)
      • CA301.1. Naturalistic science will miss a supernatural explanation.
        • (see also CI401: Science's method rules out design.)
    • CA310. Scientists find what they expect to find.
    • CA320. Scientists are pressured not to challenge established dogma.
      • CA320.1. Mims was fired because he was a creationist.
      • CA320.2. Damadian was denied a Nobel prize because he was a creationist.
    • CA321. Scientists are motivated to support naturalism and reject creationism.
      • CA321.1. Scientists' conclusions are motivated by money.
    • CA325. Creationists are prevented from publishing in science journals.
    • CA340. Evolutionists do not accept debate challenges.
      • CA341. Evolutionists have not met Hovind's challenge to prove evolution.
      • CA342. Evolutionists do not accept Walt Brown's debate challenge.
      • CA343. Evolutionists refuse Mastropaolo's "Life Science Prize" challenge.
    • CA350. No gradual biochemical evolution models have been published.
  • CA500. "Survival of the fittest" is a tautology.
  • CA510. Creationism and evolution are the only 2 models.
    • CA510.1. Problems with evolution are evidence for creation.
  • CA520. The Origin of Species does not address speciation.
• CA600: Theology
  • (see also CH: Biblical Creationism)
  • CA601. Evolution requires naturalism.
    • CA601.1. Evolution's materialism or naturalism denies a role for God.
    • (see also CA301: Science is naturalistic.)
    • (see also CI401: Science's method rules out design.)
  • CA602. Evolution is atheistic.
    • CA602.1. Darwin made it easy to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist.
    • CA602.2. Scientists aim to make God unnecessary.
  • CA603. Naturalistic evolution rules out all but a Deist god.
  • CA610. Evolution is a religion.
  • CA611. Evolutionary theory has become sacrosanct.
  • CA612. Evolution requires as much faith as creationism.
  • CA620. If man comes from random causes, life has no purpose or meaning.
  • CA622. Without a literal Fall, there is no need for Jesus and redemption.
  • CA630. Animals are not moral, aesthetic, idealistic, or religious.
  • CA640. Do you want to be descended from a monkey?
  • CA650. Death and suffering before humanity implies an unmerciful God.
    • CA651. God would have pronounced death and suffering "very good."
    • CA652. Christ's death was unjust if physical death was not the penalty for sin.
  • CA660. Pope's statement about evolution was mistranslated.
  • CA662. It is not true that the church used to teach a flat earth.

CB: Biology

• CB0: Abiogenesis
  • CB000. Pasteur proved life only comes from life (law of biogenesis).
  • CB010. The odds of life forming are incredibly small.
    • CB010.1. Even the simplest life is incredibly complex.
    • CB010.2. First cells could not come together by chance.
  • CB015. DNA needs proteins to form; proteins need DNA.
  • CB020. Why is new life not still being generated today?
  • CB025. Not all amino acids needed for life have been formed experimentally.
  • CB026. Abiogenesis experiments produce toxins, such as cyanide and formaldehyde.
  • CB030. Early molecules would have decayed.
    • CB030.1. Early molecules would have been destroyed by ultraviolet light.
  • CB035. Miller's experiments had an invalid assumption of the type of atmosphere.
    • CB035.1. Earth's early atmosphere had abundant oxygen.
    • CB035.2. Earth's early atmosphere had no reducing gases.
    • CB035.3. Amino acids are not generated from just CO2, nitrogen, and water.
  • CB040. Life uses only left-handed amino acids.
  • CB050. Abiogenesis is speculative without evidence.
  • CB090. Evolution is baseless without a theory of abiogenesis.
• CB100: Genetics
  • CB100. Mutations are rare.
  • CB101. Most mutations are harmful.
    • CB101.1. Mutations are accidents; things do not get built by accident.
    • CB101.2. Mutations do not produce new features.
  • CB102. Mutations do not add information.
    • CB102.1. Dawkins could not give an example of increasing information.
  • CB110. Microevolution selects only existing variation.
  • CB120. Genetic load from mutations would make populations unviable.
  • CB121. The cost of natural selection is prohibitive (Haldane's dilemma).
  • CB130. "Junk" DNA is not really junk.
  • CB141. Chromosome counts differ greatly and unsystematically between species.
  • CB150. Functional genetic sequences are too rare to evolve from one to another.
  • CB180. The genetic code is a language.
• CB200: Molecular Biology
  • CB200. Some systems are irreducibly complex.
    • CB200.1. Bacterial flagella are irreducibly complex.
    • CB200.2. Blood clotting is irreducibly complex.
    • CB200.3. Protein transport within a cell is irreducibly complex.
    • CB200.4. The immune system is irreducibly complex.
    • CB200.5. The metabolic pathway for AMP synthesis is too complex to have evolved.
  • CB211. An antigen receptor protein structure is same in camels and sharks.
  • (see also CA350: No gradualistic biochemical models published.)
• CB300: Physiology and Anatomy
  • CB300. Complex organs couldn't have evolved.
    • CB301. The eye is too complex to have evolved.
      • (see also CB921.1: What use is half an eye?)
    • CB302. The ear is too complex to have evolved.
    • CB303. The brain is too complex to have evolved.
      • (see also CB400: Behavior and Cognition)
    • CB310. The bombardier beetle is too complex to have evolved.
      • CB310.1. Bombardier beetle chemicals would explode if mixed without an inhibitor.
    • CB311. Butterfly metamorphosis is too complex to have evolved.
      • CB311.1. Evolution can't explain butterfly evolving from caterpillar.
    • CB325. The giraffe neck could not evolve without a special circulatory system.
    • CB326. The woodpecker tongue could not have evolved.
    • CB340. Organs and organ systems would have been useless until all parts were in place.
    • CB341. Snake venom and hollow fangs could not have evolved simultaneously.
  • CB350. Sex cannot have evolved.
    • (see also CB610: no mate for 1st of a species.)
  • CB360. Vestigial organs may have functions.
    • CB360.1. The human appendix is functional, not vestigial.
    • (see also CB130: Junk DNA not really junk.)
  • CB361. Vestigial organs are just evidence of decay, not evolution.
    • CB361.1. Presently useless vestigial organs once had function.
  • CB365. Spinal treatments based on evolutionary theory fail.
  • CB370. Endorphins at death indicate a beneficent creator, not evolution.
  • CB381. Men have fewer ribs than women.
• CB400: Behavior and Cognition
  • CB400. Evolution cannot explain consciousness.
    • CB400.1. Evolution does not explain human intelligence.
  • CB401. Instincts are too complex to have evolved.
  • CB402. Evolution does not explain language ability.
  • CB403. Evolution does not explain homosexuality.
  • CB411. Evolution does not explain morals, especially altruism.
  • CB420. Evolution does not explain art.
  • CB421. Evolution does not explain music.
  • CB430. Evolution does not explain personality and emotions.
  • CB440. Evolution does not explain religion.
• CB500: Botany
  • CB501. Dendrochronology is suspect because two or more rings can grow per year.
  • CB510. Evolution cannot explain photosynthesis.
• CB600: Ecology and Population Biology
  • CB601. The traditional peppered moth story is no longer supportable.
    • CB601.1. Peppered moths do not rest on tree trunks, and pictures of them there were faked.
    • CB601.2. Peppered moths occur in uncamouflaged colors in many areas.
      • CB601.2.1. Dark moths never completely replaced light ones in Manchester.
      • CB601.2.2. In several areas dark moths were more common than expected.
      • CB601.2.3. Dark moths increased in s. Britain after pollution control began.
      • CB601.2.4. In places, light moths increased before lichens reappeared.
      • CB601.2.5. Light moths increased before trees got lighter.
    • CB601.3. Direct mutagenesis better explains peppered moth variation.
    • CB601.4. An increased recapture rate suggests fraud in Kettlewell's data.
    • (see also CB910.2: Peppered moths remain same species.)
  • CB610. The first individual of a new species would not find a mate.
  • CB620. Human population growth indicates a young earth.
  • CB621. Humanity was traced back to an African Eve.
    • CB621.1. Mitochondrial Eve lived only 6500 years ago.
  • CB630. Mutually dependent species could not have evolved.
• CB700: Developmental Biology
  • CB701. Haeckel falsified his embryo pictures.
    • CB701.1. Recapitulation theory is not supported.
  • CB704. Human embryos do not have gill slits.
  • CB710. Genes with major effects on development are conserved across phyla.
  • CB731. Finger development disproves birds descended from dinosaurs.
  • CB732. Finger development differs greatly between human and frog.
  • CB751. Bilateral symmetry is improbable under evolution.
• CB800: Systematics
  • CB801. Science cannot define "species."
  • CB805. Evolution predicts a continuum of organisms, not discrete kinds.
    • (see also CC201: smooth continuum through the fossil record.)
  • CB810. Homology cannot be evidence of ancestry if it is defined thus.
  • CB811. Homologous structures are not produced by homologous genes.
  • CB821. Phylogenetic analyses are inconsistent.
  • CB822. Evolution's tree-like pattern is discredited.
• CB900: Evolution
  • (see also CB102: Mutations don't add information.)
  • CB901. Macroevolution has never been observed.
    • CB901.1. Range of variation is limited within kinds.
    • CB901.2. No new phyla, classes, or orders have appeared.
    • CB901.3. Darwin's finches show only microevolution.
  • CB902. Microevolution is distinct from macroevolution.
    • CB902.1. There are barriers to large change.
    • CB902.2. Small changes do not imply large changes.
  • CB904. No entirely new features have evolved.
    • (see also CB101.2: mutations don't produce new features.)
  • CB910. No new species have been observed.
    • CB910.1. Fruit fly experiments produce only fruit flies.
    • CB910.2. Peppered moths remained the same species.
  • CB920. No new body parts have evolved.
  • CB921. New structures would be useless until fully developed.
    • (see also CB300: complex organs can't evolve.)
    • CB921.1. What use is half an eye?
    • CB921.2. What use is half a wing?
  • CB922. No two-celled life exists intermediate between one- and multicelled.
  • CB925. We do not see creatures in various stages of completion.
  • CB926. Preadaptation implies that organs evolved before they were needed.
  • CB928. Why are beneficial traits not evolved more often?
    • CB928.1. If intelligence is adaptive, other apes should have evolved it.
  • CB929. Evolution does not explain our using one tenth of our brain.
  • CB930. Some fossil species are still living.
    • CB930.1. The coelacanth, thought extinct for ages, is still living.
    • CB930.2. A plesiosaur was found by a Japanese trawler.
    • CB930.3. Dinosaurs may still be alive in the Congo.
  • CB932. Some modern species are apparently degenerate, not higher forms.
  • CB940. Pure chance cannot create new structures.
    • CB940.1. Odds of many successive beneficial mutations are minuscule.
  • CB941. How do things know how to evolve?
  • CB950. Overspecialization with no adaptive value sometimes occurs.
  • CB951. Long-term trends (orthogenesis) do not fit evolutionary theory.
  • CB952. The evolution of specialized diets would not be adaptive.
  • CB990. Proposed evolution scenarios are just-so stories.

CC: Paleontology

• CC0: Physical Anthropology
  • CC000-CC049: Questionable fossils
    • CC000: Specific hominid fossils were hoaxed
      • CC001. Piltdown man was a hoax.
        • CC001.1. Piltdown man was the subject of 500 doctoral dissertations.
      • CC002. Nebraska man was a hoax.
      • CC003. Lucy's knee was found far from the rest of the skeleton.
      • CC004. Ten Peking Man skeletons were suppressed.
    • CC020: Specific hominid fossils were misidentified
      • CC021. "Orce Man" was a donkey skull.
    • CC030. All human fossils would fit on a billiard table.
    • CC040. Anthropologists disagree.
      • CC041. Homo habilis is an invalid taxon.
  • CC050. All hominid fossils are fully human or fully ape.
    • CC051. Neanderthal was based on a disfigured human.
      • CC051.1. Neanderthals were humans with rickets.
    • CC052. Laetoli footprints were human.
    • CC054. KP 271 (a fossil humerus) was human.
    • CC061. French scientists called Peking Man "monkey-like."
    • CC080. Australopithecus was fully ape, closer to chimp.
  • CC100: Human fossils are out of place.
    • CC101. Human footprints have been found with dinosaur tracks at Paluxy.
    • CC102. Sandal footprints have been found associated with trilobites.
    • CC110. Moab man was found in Cretaceous sandstone.
    • CC111. Malachite man was found in Cretaceous sandstone.
    • CC112. Castenedolo, Olmo, and Calaveras skulls were found in Pliocene strata.
    • CC120. Baugh found a fossilized finger from the Cretaceous.
    • CC130. A petrified hammer was found in Cretaceous rocks.
    • CC131. An iron pot was found encased in Carboniferous coal.
  • CC150: Other Anthropology
    • CC150. If we are descended from apes, why are there still apes around?
• CC200: Transitional fossils
  • CC200. Transitional fossils are lacking.
    • CC200.1. There should be billions of transitional fossils.
  • CC201. We should see smooth change through the fossil record, not gaps.
    • CC201.1. Punctuated equilibrium was ad hoc to justify gaps.
    • (see also CB805: smooth continuum among living creatures.)
  • CC210: Specific examples of non-transition
    • CC211. There are gaps between invertebrates and vertebrates.
    • CC212. There are gaps between fish and amphibians.
    • CC213. There are gaps between amphibians and reptiles.
    • CC214. There are gaps between reptiles and birds.
      • CC214.1. Archaeopteryx was probably not an ancestor of modern birds.
        • CC214.1.1. Archaeopteryx is fully bird
      • CC214.2. Duck-billed dinosaur find disproves its bird ancestry.
    • CC215. There are gaps between reptiles and mammals.
    • CC216.1. There are gaps between land mammals and whales.
    • CC216.2. Horse fossils do not show evolution.
    • CC220. Arthropods arose suddenly.
      • CC220.1. There are no fossil ancestors of insects.
    • CC250. There are no fossil ancestors of plants.
      • CC251. Progymnosperms are imaginary evolutionary ancestors.
• CC300: Fossil Record
  • CC300. The Cambrian explosion shows all kinds of life appearing suddenly.
    • CC301. Cambrian explosion contradicts evolutionary "tree" pattern.
  • CC310: Dating of fossils
    • (see also CD0: Geochronology)
    • CC310. Fossils are dated from strata; strata are dated from fossils.
      • (see also CD103: Geologic column assumes evolution.)
  • CC330: Polystrate fossils
    • CC331. Polystrate fossils indicate massive sudden deposition.
    • CC332. Yellowstone's Specimen Creek fossil forests were evidently transported.
      • CC332.1. Specimen Creek fossil trees grew at the same time.
      • CC332.2. Orientations show Specimen Creek fossil trees were transported.
    • CC335. A fossil whale was found vertically through several strata.
  • CC340. Many fossils are out of place.
    • (see also CC100: Human fossils out of place)
    • CC341. Recent pollen has been found in old rocks.
  • CC350: Some fossils are faked.
    • (see also CC000: Hominid fossils faked)
    • CC351. Archaeopteryx is a fake.
    • CC352. Archaeoraptor was a fake.
  • CC360: Taphonomy
    • CC360. No new fossils are being formed.
    • CC361. Fossils can form quickly.
      • CC361.1. Coal and oil can form quickly.
      • CC361.2. Mammoths that were quickly frozen have been found.
      • CC361.3. Contorted positions of fossil animals indicate rapid burial.
    • CC362. Large collections of fossils indicate catastrophism.
    • CC363. Fossilization requires sudden burial.
    • CC364. Sea fossils have been found on mountaintops.
    • CC365. Footprints in the Coconino Sandstone appear to have been made underwater.
      • CC365.1. Coconino Sandstone was deposited underwater.
    • CC371. Evidence of blood in a Tyrannosaurus bone indicates recent burial.
      • CC371.1. Soft tissues from a Tyrannosaurus bone indicate recent burial.
    • CC373. Jurassic shells from mud springs are remarkably preserved.
• CC400: Methodology
  • CC401. Paleontologists reconstruct an entire animal from a single bone.

CD: Geology

• CD0: Geochronology
  • (see also CD241: Varves can form quickly.)
  • CD000: Radiometric dating makes false assumptions
    • CD001. Radiometric dating falsely assumes rocks are closed systems.
    • CD002. Radiometric dating falsely assumes initial conditions are known.
    • CD004. Cosmic rays and free neutrinos affect U and Ar decay rates.
    • (see also CF200: Radiometric dating)
  • CD010. Radiometric dating gives unreliable results.
    • CD011. Carbon dating gives inaccurate results.
      • CD011.1. Variable C-14/C-12 ratio invalidates C-14 dating.
      • CD011.2. Vollosovitch and Dima mammoths yielded inconsistent C-14 dates.
      • CD011.3. Living snails were C-14 dated at 2,300 and 27,000 years old.
      • CD011.4. A freshly killed seal was C-14 dated at 1,300 years old.
      • CD011.5. Triassic wood from Australia was dated at 33,000 years old.
      • CD011.6. Ancient coal and oil are C-14 dated as only 50,000 years old.
    • CD012. U-Th dating gives inaccurate results for modern volcanic rocks.
    • CD013. K-Ar dating gives inaccurate results for modern volcanic rocks.
      • CD013.1. K-Ar dates of 1986 dacite from Mount St. Helens are very old.
    • CD014. Isochron dating gives unreliable results.
      • CD014.1. Isochron date of young Grand Canyon lava is excessively old.
    • CD015. Zircons retain too much helium for an old earth.
    • CD016. The U-Th-Pb method, properly corrected for neutron capture, gives recent dates.
  • CD020. Consistency of radiometric dating comes from selective reporting.
  • CD031. KBS Tuff shows the flaws of radiometric dating.
• CD100: Geological Column
  • (see also CH540: Flood effects)
  • CD101. Entire geological column does not exist.
  • CD102. The geological column is sometimes out of order.
    • CD102.1. Out-of-order strata occur at the Lewis Overthrust.
  • CD103. The geologic column is based on the assumption of evolution.
    • (see also CC310: Circular dating of fossils and strata.)
  • CD110. Meteor craters are never found in deeper strata.
  • CD111. Meteorites are never found in deeper strata.
• CD200: Sedimentation
  • (see also CH540: Flood effects)
  • CD200. Uniformitarian assumption is untenable.
  • CD202. Sandstone and shale layers are too extensive for normal deposition.
  • CD203. Limestone and dolomite layers are too extensive for normal deposition.
  • CD210. The mouth of the Colorado River does not have enough sediment for the Grand Canyon.
  • CD211. Mississippi delta could have formed in 5,000 years.
  • CD220. There is not enough sediment in the ocean for an old earth.
    • CD220.1. Much more sediment is deposited than removed by subduction.
  • CD221. Oceans do not have enough dissolved minerals for an old earth.
    • CD221.1. Sodium accumulates in oceans too fast for an old earth.
  • CD222. Juvenile water is added to oceans too fast for an old earth.
  • CD230. Natural gas escapes too fast to allow for long ages.
  • CD231. High pressures in oil fields would have bled off if earth were old.
  • CD232. Oil seepage would have drained offshore reservoirs in 20,000 years.
  • CD240. Experiments show that strata can violate principles of superposition.
  • CD241. Varves can form in less than a year.
  • CD250. Stalactites can grow very rapidly.
  • (see also CC365.1: Coconino sandstone deposited underwater.)
• CD300: Evaporation
  • CD301. Evaporites could form without evaporation.
  • CD302. Evaporites are too thick.
  • CD303. Evaporites contain no organic matter.
• CD400: Glaciation
  • CD410. World War II airplanes are now beneath thousands of "annual" ice layers.
• CD500: Mountain Building
  • CD501. On an old earth, mountains would have eroded by now.
  • CD502. Volcanic mountains are built too fast for an old earth.
  • CD510. Folded rocks must have been soft when folded.
• CD600: Erosion
  • (see also CH540: Flood effects)
  • CD610. The erosion rate of Niagara Falls' rim indicates a young earth.
  • CD620. Average soil depth is consistent with a young earth.
• CD700: Geophysics and Plate Tectonics
  • CD701. The earth's magnetic field is decaying, indicating a young earth.
    • CD701.1. Cowling's theorem disproves dynamo theory of earth's magnetic field.
  • CD740. The theory of plate tectonics is wrong.
    • CD741. Midocean magnetic anomalies are not reversals.
  • CD750. Plate tectonics occurred catastrophically and has since slowed.
• CD800: Climate Change
  • CD821. Sahara Desert is expanding.

CE: Astronomy and Cosmology

• CE000: Earth
  • CE001. There is not enough helium in the atmosphere for an old earth.
  • CE010. NASA scientists found a day missing.
  • CE011. Earth's rotation is slowing, indicating a young earth.
    • CE011.1. The frequency of leap seconds indicates a young earth.
  • CE020. An old earth would be covered by 182 feet of meteoric dust.
• CE100: Moon
  • CE101. There is not enough moon dust for an old universe.
  • CE110. The moon is receding at a rate too fast for an old universe.
  • CE130. Lunar moonquakes, lava flows, and gas emissions indicates the moon's youth.
  • (see also CF220: Short-lived U-326, Th-230 found on moon.)
• CE200: Planets and Solar System
  • CE210. Venus's high temperature and atmosphere should have eroded its surface features.
  • CE230. Io's great volcanic activity indicates a young age.
  • CE231. Jupiter and Saturn are cooling too rapidly to be old.
  • CE240. Saturn's rings are unstable.
  • CE260. Three planets and several moons revolve backwards.
    • CE260.1. Retrograde motion of planets disproves the big bang.
  • CE261. Comets would not have lasted in an old universe.
    • CE261.1. Oort cloud and Kuiper belt are ad hoc fantasies of astronomers.
  • CE280. Solar wind should have cleared the inner solar system of microparticles.
  • CE281. The Poynting-Robertson effect would remove space dust in an old solar system.
• CE300: Sun and Stars
  • CE301. The lack of solar neutrinos indicates that the stellar model is wrong.
  • CE302. The sun has most of the mass but little angular momentum of the solar system.
  • CE310. A shrinking sun indicates a young sun.
    • CE310.1. Helmholtz's contraction theory says the sun is young.
  • CE311. The faint young sun paradox contradicts an old earth.
  • CE351. Sirius was a red star 2,000 years ago and is a white dwarf now.
  • CE380. Galaxies should lose their spiral shape over millions of years.
• CE400: Cosmology
  • (see also CI300: Anthropic principle)
  • CE401. There are too few supernova remnants for an old universe.
  • CE410. Physical constants are only assumed constant.
    • CE411. The speed of light has changed.
      • CE411.1. Physicists found that the speed of light was once faster.
    • CE412. Gravitational time dilation made distant clocks run faster.
    • (see also CF210: Radiometric dating assumes constant rates.)
  • CE420. The big bang theory is wrong.
  • CE421. The cosmos has an axis, contrary to big bang models.
  • CE425. Red shift comes from light aging, not expansion of the universe.
  • CE440. Where did space, time, energy, and laws of physics come from?
  • CE441. Explosions such as the big bang do not produce order or information.

CF: Physics and Mathematics

• (see also CE400: Cosmology)
• CF000: Second Law of Thermodynamics and Information Theory
  • (see also CB102: Mutations don't add information.)
  • (see also CE441: Big Bang doesn't produce information.)
  • CF001. The second law of thermodynamics prohibits evolution.
    • CF001.1. Systems left to themselves invariably tend toward disorder.
    • CF001.2. The second law of thermodynamics, and the trend to disorder, is universal.
    • CF001.3. Instructions are necessary to produce order.
    • CF001.4. The second law is about organized complexity, not entropy.
    • CF001.5. Evolution needs an energy conversion mechanism to utilize energy.
  • CF002. Complexity does not come from simplicity.
    • CF002.1. Tornadoes in junkyards do not build things.
  • CF003. How could information, such as in DNA, assemble itself?
  • CF005. 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to information theory.
  • CF010. Cybernetic simulations show that Darwinian processes do not produce order.
  • CF011. Evolutionary algorithms smuggle in design in the fitness function.
    • CF011.1. The outcome of Dawkins's WEASEL program was prespecified.
    • CF011.2. NFL theorems prove that evolutionary algorithms do not beat blind search.
• CF100: First Law of Thermodynamics
  • CF101. The universe's energy cannot come from nothing.
    • (see also CE440: Origin of everything; CI200: First cause)
• CF200: Radiometric Decay
  • (see also CD000: Radiometric dating)
  • CF201. Polonium haloes indicate a young earth.
  • CF210. Radiometric dating falsely assumes that rates are constant.
    • (see also CE410: Physical constants only assumed constant.)
  • CF220. Short-lived isotopes Th-230 and U-236 exist on the moon.

CG: Miscellaneous Anti-Evolution

• CG000: History
  • CG001. Darwin recanted on his deathbed.
  • CG010. The oldest living thing is younger than 4,900 years.
  • CG020. All all languages and religions could develop in 3,000 years.
    • (see also CB620: Population growth.)
  • CG030. Oldest structures, such as pyramids, are already very complex.
• CG100: Linguistics
  • CG101. Chinese glyph for "ark" is literally "8 mouths."
  • CG110. The first known languages are highly complex.
  • CG111. Why are languages getting less complex?
• CG200: Folklore
  • CG201. There are flood myths from all over the world.
  • CG202.1. The Miao flood myth is very like the story of Noah.
  • CG202.2. The Chinese Hihking flood myth is very like the story of Noah.

CH: Biblical Creationism

• CH000: Biblical Creationism Generally
  • CH001. Creationism has explanatory power.
  • CH010. Creationism, being Bible-based, is good.
    • CH010.1. Learning creationism stimulates mental health, joy, and morals.
  • CH030. God is all-good.
    • (see also CA650: Death before humanity implies unmerciful God.)
  • CH050. Genesis is foundational to the Bible.
  • CH055. Noncreationist Christians are compromisers.
• CH100: Biblical Accuracy
  • CH100. The Bible says it; I believe it; that settles it.
    • CH100.1. Science must be interpreted in light of scripture.
  • CH101. The Bible is inerrant.
    • CH101.1. If part of the Bible is wrong, none of it can be trusted.
  • CH102. The Bible is literal.
    • CH102.1. Genesis must be literal; it is straightforward narrative.
    • CH102.2. Genesis must be literal; later writers refer to it as fact.
      • CH102.2.1. Jesus refers to creation and flood as though they were literal.
  • CH103. Bible claims inspiration.
  • CH110. Prophecies prove the accuracy of the Bible.
  • CH120. The Bible must be accurate because archaeology supports it.
  • CH130. The Bible's accuracy on other scientific points shows overall accuracy.
    • CH131. The Bible says that the earth is round.
    • CH132. The Bible says that the earth is unsupported.
    • CH133. The Bible got the water cycle right.
    • CH134. Records say civilization was man's original state.
    • CH135. The Bible specifies good medical and hygienic practices.
      • CH135.1. The Bible specifies the best time for circumcision.
      • CH135.2. Moses reveals that blood is the essence of life.
    • (see also CB621: Humanity traced to an African Eve.)
  • CH180: The Bible is unique in other ways.
    • CH181. The Bible is popular.
    • CH182. The Bible is influential.
    • CH183. The Bible is target of persecution.
    • CH184. The Bible is intellectually honest.
  • CH190. The Bible is harmonious throughout.
• CH200-CH799: Young Earth Creationism
  • CH200: Age of the Universe
    • CH200. The universe is 6,000-10,000 years old.
    • CH210. The earth is 6,000-10,000 years old.
    • CH220. The universe was created with apparent age.
  • CH300: Death and the Fall
    • CH301. There was no death or decay before the Fall.
    • CH310. The pre-Flood vapor canopy would have made the world Edenic.
    • CH311. The pre-Flood vapor canopy would have extended human lifetimes.
    • CH320. Life is deteriorating.
      • CH321. Parasites are degenerations of free-living species.
  • CH350: Created Kinds
    • CH350. Organisms come in discrete kinds.
    • CH370. The stars and galaxies are unchanging.
  • CH400-CH599: Flood
    • CH400: Source of Flood
      • CH401. Flood from vapor canopy.
      • CH410. Flood from comet.
      • CH420. Hydroplate theory.
      • CH430. Runaway subduction.
    • CH500: The Ark
      • CH500. Noah's ark has been found.
        • CH501. We can expect to find Noah's ark on Mount Ararat.
        • CH502.1. Noah's ark may have been photographed on Ararat in 1949.
        • CH502.2. ERTS satellite photographed Noah's ark in 1973.
        • CH503. Noah's ark has been found near Dogubayazit, Turkey.
          • CH503.1. Anchor stones of Noah's ark have been found.
          • CH503.2. The Turkish government officially recognized the site of Noah's ark.
        • CH504.1. James Bryce found a 4-foot timber high on Ararat.
        • CH504.2. Navarra retrieved hand-hewn wood from high on Ararat.
        • CH504.3. Hardwicke Knight found soft wood timbers on Ararat.
        • CH505.1. Yearam guided three vile scientists to Noah's ark in 1916.
        • CH505.2. An 1883 Turkish expedition found Noah's ark.
        • CH505.3. Prince Nouri of Baghdad found the ark in 1887.
        • CH505.4. Hagopian visited the ark with his uncle around 1908.
        • CH505.5. Russian aviator Roskovitsky photographed the ark.
        • CH505.6. Resit, a Kurdish farmer, found the ark in 1948.
        • CH505.7. Local Kurds led Ed Davis to the ark in 1943.
        • CH505.8. Ed Behling was led to the ark in 1973.
      • CH508. Chinese treasure ships show Noah's ark was feasible.
      • CH510-CH529: Animals on the Ark
        • CH511. Insects survived on floating vegetation mats.
        • CH512. All kinds could fit.
          • CH512.1. Juveniles of large animals were taken aboard.
          • CH512.2. The average land animal is the size of a sheep.
        • CH513. Animals hibernated on the ark.
        • CH514. The crew could feed and care for the animals.
          • CH514.1. Many animals do not require fresh or live food.
        • CH520. Pre-Flood animals lived in a uniform climate.
        • CH521. Animals' exacting needs could have evolved after the Flood.
      • CH540-CH599: Effects of the Flood
        • CH541. Aquatic organisms could have survived the Flood.
        • CH542. Plants could have survived the Flood.
        • CH550. The geologic column was deposited by the Flood.
          • (see also CC364: Seashells on mountains.)
        • CH560: Fossils were deposited by the Flood.
          • CH561: Fossil order was determined by the Flood.
            • CH561.1. Fossils are sorted by ecological zonation.
            • CH561.2. Fossils are sorted hydrologically.
            • CH561.3. Fossils are sorted by the ability to escape.
            • CH561.4. Fossils are sorted by a combination of these factors.
          • (see also CC361: Fossils form quickly.)
        • CH570. High mountains were raised during the Flood.
        • CH580. The Flood shaped the earth's surface in other ways.
        • CH581. The Grand Canyon was carved by retreating Flood waters.
          • CH581.1. Rapid erosion on Mount St. Helens shows Grand Canyon could form suddenly.
        • CH590. The Flood caused an ice age.
  • CH700: Miscellaneous Young Earth Creationism
    • CH710. Man and dinosaurs coexisted.
      • (see also CC100: Human fossils out of place)
      • (see also CB930.3: Dinosaurs may be in the Congo.)
      • CH710.1. Ica stones show that humans and dinosaurs coexisted.
      • CH710.2. Dinosaur figurines from Acambaro show a human-dinosaur association.
      • CH711. Behemoth, from the book of Job, was a dinosaur.
        • CH711.1. Leviathan, from the book of Job, was a dinosaur.
      • CH712. Dragons were dinosaurs.
        • CH712.1. Some dinosaurs breathed fire.
• CH800: Day-Age Creationism
  • CH801. Genesis 1 got the order of events right.
• CH900: Geocentrism
  • CH901. Bible says the sun goes around the earth.
  • CH910. Relativity shows geocentrism is true.

CI: Intelligent Design

• (see also CH000: Creationism Generally)
• (see also CF000: 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and Information Theory)
• CI000: ID as Science
  • CI001. Intelligent design theory is scientific.
    • CI001.1. Intelligent design theory is not religious.
    • CI001.2. Intelligent design is not creationism.
    • CI001.3. Intelligent design is mainstream.
    • CI001.4. Intelligent design has been published in peer-reviewed journals.
    • (see also CA041.1: Santorum Amendment.)
  • CI002. Intelligent design has explanatory power.
  • CI009. Evidence for design disproves evolutionary mechanisms.
  • CI010. There is a law of conservation of information.
  • (see also CF011: Design from ev. algorithms comes from fitness function.)
• CI100-CI199: Detecting Design
  • (see also CA100: Argument from incredulity.)
  • CI100. Design is detectable.
    • CI100.1. Look; is design not obvious?
  • CI101. Complexity indicates design.
  • CI102. Irreducible complexity indicates design.
  • CI110. Complex specified information indicates design.
  • CI111. Dembski's filter can detect design.
    • CI111.1. Specified information criterion produces no false positives.
    • CI111.2. Specified complexity characterizes what intelligent agents do.
  • CI113. Genetic algorithms require a designer to specify desired outcome.
    • (see also CF011: Design from ev. algorithms comes from fitness function.)
  • CI120. Purpose indicates design.
  • CI130. Functional integration indicates design.
  • CI141. Similarities in DNA and anatomy are due to common design.
    • CI141.1. Similar structures for similar functions, different for different.
  • CI190. SETI researchers expect that they can detect design.
  • CI191. Archaeologists and forensic scientists can detect design.
• CI200: First Cause.
  • CI200. There must have been a first cause.
• CI300: Anthropic Principle.
  • CI301. The cosmos is fine-tuned to permit human life.
  • CI302. The cosmos is fine-tuned to permit scientific discovery.
• CI400: Meta-arguments
  • CI401. The methodology of science rules out even considering design.
    • (see also CA301.1: Science rules out supernatural explanations.)
  • CI402. Evolutionists have blinded themselves to seeing design.
    • (see also CA230.1: Evolutionists interpret per their preconceptions.)
  • CI410. Design requires a designer.

CJ: Other Creationism

• CJ000: Vedic Creationism
  • CJ001. Mankind has existed essentially unchanged for billions of years.
• CJ200-CJ499: Native North American Creationism
  • CJ300: Creationism from individual tribes
    • CJ311. The 9,400-year-old Kennewick Man was an Umatilla ancestor.
• CJ500-CJ699: Islamic Creationism
  • CJ500: Qur'an Accuracy
    • CJ530. The Qur'an's accuracy on scientific points shows overall accuracy.
      • CJ531. The Qur'an speaks of an expanding universe.
      • CJ533. The Qur'an describes human embryology accurately.

Authors

[and no significant data/evidence led dissent about its truth within the worldwide scientific community for more than a century]

Now that's absolutely incorrect!

No it isn't. If you think otherwise, feel free to present the *SIGNIFICANT* amount of *EVIDENCE-DRIVEN* dissent about evolution from within the scientific community from, say, 1880-1980. We'll wait.

You present these thesis as fact, when the reality is many of evolution's own proponents have decided that the evidence does not support evolution,

No they haven't. Feel free to name, say, five if you think you can (out of the "many" you claim exist).

and that too many assumptions and mathematical errors have been made over time to consider the theory of evolution valid.

Wrong again. My, you *have* been reading too many creationist tracts and not enough science journals, haven't you?

Every time a scientist decides evolution is bunk, you in the "darwin community" turn on them, deride them, then pretend they don't exist.

No, just point out the many errors they're making when they turn their engineering degree or whatever to a field they poorly understand. Or in Behe's case, when he inexplicably makes elementary errors in basic biology despite a biology degree -- I sometimes suspect he's "trolling" the creationists in order to make money from book sales. Heck, at times I'm tempted to do that myself, there seems to be a lot of money in it.

Let me see, who was the prominent scientist who was for evolution until he published an article in June of 2004 that debunked Darwin?

Got me. If you're thinking of Antony Flew, you're grossly misrepresenting what he *actually* changed his mind about.

You're free to believe what you like, however false and unproven it is.

Indeed, which is why the anti-evolutionists are free to do so. They believe a lot of utterly false things about science.

The facts are, the more science looks at the "new earth" theory, the "old earth" theory gets debunked and the Bible is proven correct.

...you're free to believe that, even though it's false. If you don't want to go learn any actual science, and just want to parrot creationist falsehoods about the state of the evidence without personally going and *learning* the subject yourself, that's entirely your right.

Just don't try to teach that horse manure in science classes. Telling students lies about science, telling them lies about the evidence, is not acceptable.

Look, you're clearly as much a victim of those lies as the students would be if this nonsense were to get into their classrooms. Someone has fed you garbage, polluting your mind with falsehoods. I blame them, not you. But you *do* have some responsibility in the matter -- now that you have been notified that you've been unknowingly repeating lies, like a too-trusting follower of Michael Moore, you need to go and learn more about the subject yourself, so that you can replace the propaganda in your head with actual knowledge of the topic, and so that you can innoculate yourself from future propagandists. And stop repeating material from the same unreliable sources, until you're able to personally *know* whether it's valid information, or more of the same dishonesties and ignorant presumptions.