Replies

The problem is, at least according to some of the responses I have seen here over time, that creationists do not accept the validity of the fossil record or DNA testing. They argue that speciation, say, as evidenced in humans fossils, is a result of deformation of samples or science's utter failure to classify the samples correctly. As to comparative primate morphology, creationists refuse to accept the structural similarities from primates to proto-hominids-to modern humans and insist that either some fraud is being perpetrated or that the forms are strictly variations within one species. The fact that humans and chimpanzees differ gentically by only one chromosome is probably the most difficult for them to explain away.
The problem lies in the passage of time and in the geologic changes have which have had such great impact on flora and fauna. If you're not willing to accept the age of the earth and the date of emergence of now-extinct species which gave rise to more modern forms (which is what creationists are hobbled by) then, you are relegated to the dust bins of pseudo-science where predictions must fail, or as you said, discoveries never discovered due to lack of research and inquiry.

The problem is, at least according to some of the responses I have seen here over time, that creationists do not accept the validity of the fossil record or DNA testing.

No, what the opponents of evolution do not accept is made up stories. That is two different things. The fossil record does not support evolution. The Cambrian explosion totally contradicts evolution, so much in fact that it made Gould and Eldredge give up on Darwinian evolution. The fossil record is also full of gaps in the most important places - such as in mammalian evolution. The greatest change in organism functioning in vertebrates - and the most recent also. This change should because of both these reasons be the most detailed, the fullest, and best supported of all the changes in species and yet there is practically no evidence at all for the gradual evolution of mammals.

As to DNA evidence, there is none. The DNA evidence contradicts evolution. The evolutionists have to 'pick and choose' similarities amongst the millions of species in existence with thousands of different genes to make up what seems like an argument for their side. Anyone can support their side by picking and choosing what fits their theory. The problem for evolution is that there are numerous examples where the DNA does not fit the evolutionary 'tree'.