Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
restoring "artistic beauty" counterexample - if someone can refute it, then please discuss on talk page
Line 1: Line 1:  
[[File:Darwin_monkey_cartoon.jpg|thumb|180px|Caricature of [[Charles Darwin]] ]]
 
[[File:Darwin_monkey_cartoon.jpg|thumb|180px|Caricature of [[Charles Darwin]] ]]
−
The [[theory of evolution]] does not permit the existence of any counterexamples.  '''If any of the counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails'''.  Moreover, even if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that<ref>Many of the counterexamples are indisputable, rendering each of their probabilities of being correct nearly 100%.</ref>), then the odds that these 70 counterexamples are ''all'' incorrect and that evolution is true is only 2%.
+
The [[theory of evolution]] does not permit the existence of any counterexamples.  '''If any of the counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails'''.  Moreover, even if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that<ref>Many of the counterexamples are indisputable, rendering each of their probabilities of being correct nearly 100%.</ref>), then the odds that these 71 counterexamples are ''all'' incorrect and that evolution is true is only 2%.
 
==Counterexamples==
 
==Counterexamples==
 
===Logical examples===
 
===Logical examples===
 
# The annual rate of extinction of species far exceeds any plausible rate of generation of species.  Expanding the amount of time for evolution to occur makes evolution even less likely.
 
# The annual rate of extinction of species far exceeds any plausible rate of generation of species.  Expanding the amount of time for evolution to occur makes evolution even less likely.
 +
# Evolution cannot explain artistic beauty, such as the brilliant autumn foliage and staggering array of beautiful marine fish, both of which originated before any human to view them; this lacks any plausible evolutionary explanation.
 
# Lack of genetic diversity among the ''Homo sapiens'' species.  Were evolution and the Old Earth theory true, the human population would show a much larger genetic variance.<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7</ref>[[File:Ara macao -on a small bicycle-8.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|[[Parrot]] feathers are a problem for evolutionists.  For more information, please see [http://creation.com/parrot-fashion parrot feathers]
 
# Lack of genetic diversity among the ''Homo sapiens'' species.  Were evolution and the Old Earth theory true, the human population would show a much larger genetic variance.<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7</ref>[[File:Ara macao -on a small bicycle-8.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|[[Parrot]] feathers are a problem for evolutionists.  For more information, please see [http://creation.com/parrot-fashion parrot feathers]
 
<br />
 
<br />
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,500

edits

Navigation menu