Science has never made life - has never once shown inter speices evolution despite a myraid of attempts --so it would be fair to extrapolate the theory is wrong!
The word cloning comes to mind. Anyway, extrapolation is a tool to help us understand things. And like any tool, it can be misused, especially when we want a predetermined result (ie proving global warming is due to carbon dioxide produced by humans).
You should seriously cogitate the mule. It is interspecies in the making.
Evolutionists extrapolate from their own cultural goals. Read the original theory by Darwin. It compels the higher life forms to rid the earth of the lower ones so they don't waste the earths precious resources. Sound like a scientific document? It was not. Charles Darwin was from the upper eschelons of society - he attended seminary (I think Catholic). He rejected his faith and went on his journey to prove there was no God in order to defend oppression of the poor by the rich. The churches were debating the legitimacy of the separation of the classes, claiming it was a violation of the Bible. The upper classes did not want to give up their position. This was their response. They didn't need God's authority, because there is no God. However, the god of nature - the god of science - made them higher and not only gave them the right, but the responsibility to take care of (or eliminate) the lower life forms since they were less evolved. Darwin's theory is nothing more than racist, elitist drivel written to justify his cultural and social power. Boy would he be surprised at all of the followers his "religion" has attracted.
Science, by definition does not account for why or who. It only addresses what and how. It cannot address when since there are no control objects, and we do not have current specimens to determine deterioration rates. Science prides itself on neutrality and absence of morality . AIDS is discussed based on physiological factors. Heart disease on how it shortens the life spann. Issues like divorce, political structure, or marital mate selection cannot be explained by it.
Evolutionists are no better than Creationists at using circular reasoning that contradicts itself. They predict the burn out time for the sun using one formula, but won't let critics "extrapolate" backwards to point out that if the earth is as old as they claim, it would be engulfed in the Sun, so how could the earth exist? There is proof that some evolutionary evidence has been "faked". Before we had DNA testing ability, it was easy to fool a lot of people with stuff like that. There is very little proof that doen't have counter evidence. For example, there is a river with a bedrock bottom out west that has human foot prints super-imposed in Dinosaur footprints - even though we didn't exist at the same time. It is like the movie Contact. If we were contacted by an alien life form. It would not change any one's opinion about the existence of God. Biological evidence like fetal heart monitors and EEG of human fetuses don't change any ones opinion about abortion. Dont even try to say that Evolutionists are objective, interested only in facts, but Creationists are only interested in defending their "faith". It is the belief that motivates the philosphy and not the philosophy that motivates the beliefs.
Nothing has actually changed - we have more knowledge and education (facts), but lack widsom and truth. My Christian dad believes in the theory of evolution. He believes it happened just as the evolutioists say, but God made it happen. Oh, he believes that God could make the world in six sets of 24 hours, he just doesn't believe that he did it that way - even though Genisis says he did. How does one reconcile that intellectually?