Actually, the molecular clock has many problems for the evolutionist. Not only are there the anomalies and common Designer arguments I mentioned above, but they actually support a creation of distinct types within ordered groups, not continuous evolution, as non-creationist microbiologist Dr Michael Denton pointed out in Evolution: A Theory in Crisis. For example, when comparing the amino acid sequence of cytochrome C of a bacterium (a prokaryote) with such widely diverse eukaryotes as yeast, wheat, silkmoth, pigeon, and horse, all of these have practically the same percentage difference with the bacterium (64 –69%). There is no intermediate cytochrome between prokaryotes and eukaryotes, and no hint that the ‘higher’ organism such as a horse has diverged more than the ‘lower’ organism such as the yeast.This is lying to the ignorant about what a tree-structured evolutionary divergence predicts. All the eukaryotes whether "higher" or "lower" diverged from the eubacteria at the same point. All the vertebrates whether "higher" or "lower" diverged from the arthropods (where the silkmoths belong) at the same time. All the post-fish vertebrates diverged from the fish at the same time. The relationships are exactly what evolution would predict.The same sort of pattern is observed when comparing cytochrome C of the invertebrate silkmoth with the vertebrates lamprey, carp, turtle, pigeon, and horse. All the vertebrates are equally divergent from the silkmoth (27–30%). Yet again, comparing globins of a lamprey (a ‘primitive’ cyclostome or jawless fish) with a carp, frog, chicken, kangaroo, and human, they are all about equidistant (73–81%). Cytochrome C’s compared between a carp and a bullfrog, turtle, chicken, rabbit, and horse yield a constant difference of 13–14%. There is no trace of any transitional series of cyclostome → fish → amphibian → reptile → mammal or bird.
No wonder there's a web page asking Does Dr Jonathan Sarfati Have Any Integrity?
It amazes me that the only response to an effort to deal with the evidence is to throw rocks. Because Dr Sarfati's work doesn't support the evolution model, it is by definition wrong?