Why does the answer from so many who are married to evolution, when questioned, have to be "well where's your better idea?" Is it not possible for holes to be poked in a theory without offering an alternative? Perhaps by first accepting that there are holes in a theory, one can then be open to looking at new possibilities.
Great question, but a better one would be; what is the "theory of evolution"? So far b_sharp hasn't been able to (or won't) produce the "theory of evolution". I was hoping he would on a previous thread, but to no avail. In other words, why bother punching holes in something that isn't even good science. The simple fact is, the "theory of evolution" does not pass the rigors of the scientific method and is therefore bad science.
At your service, WhiteKnight
My apologizes for sticking my nose into your post
This is one of the usual themes of IDers that really drives me nuts.
Species exist. They came from somewhere. The best explanation that explains their existence, and the evidence found geology, paleontology, DNA studies, etc. etc. ALL point to evolution being the cause of the various species.
In order to reject evolution, a SUPERIOR explanation for all that evidence MUST be given. Otherwise evolution wins by default, since it is the only explanation that does indeed explain all the evidence.
It is not sufficient to "poke holes" in evolution. People have "poked holes" in the theory that 19 Islamists took down the Twin Towers and have sold millions of books on the subject (in France). But it's still complete BS like the "science" of ID.
Evolution must be completely replaced with a superior theory. Otherwise it stands.