Changes

[[File:Question-Evolution-Campaign.jpg|thumbnail|250px|right|The [[Question evolution! campaign]] by [[Creation Ministries International]] is a worldwide campaign which poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.<ref>[https://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref> The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found [https://creation.com/15-questions HERE] ]]

[[File:Question-Evolution-Campaign.jpg|thumbnail|250px|right|The [[Question evolution! campaign]] by [[Creation Ministries International]] is a worldwide campaign that poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.<ref>[https://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref> The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found [https://creation.com/15-questions HERE] ]]

The [[theory of evolution]] does not permit the existence of any counterexamples.  '''If any one of the 54 counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails'''. Moreover, even if there is merely a 10% 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 '''''probability that the theory of evolution is false is more than 99%'''''.

The [[theory of evolution]] does not permit the existence of any counterexamples.  '''If any one of the 55 counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails'''. Moreover, even if there is merely a 10% 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 '''''probability that the theory of evolution is false is more than 99%'''''.

==Counterexamples==

==Counterexamples==

===Logical examples===

===Logical examples===

# Royal Truman and Peter Borger wrote concerning optimization and the genetic code: "The distribution of ‘code quality’ would roughly follow a Gaussian distribution, based on the [[law of large numbers]]. This means that as coding conventions are improved, it would be ever more difficult for natural selection to generate yet better codes."<ref>[https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_3/j21_3_84-92.pdf Genetic code optimisation: Part 2] by Royal Truman and Peter Borger</ref>   

# Royal Truman and Peter Borger wrote concerning optimization and the genetic code: "The distribution of ‘code quality’ would roughly follow a Gaussian distribution, based on the [[law of large numbers]]. This means that as coding conventions are improved, it would be ever more difficult for natural selection to generate yet better codes."<ref>[https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_3/j21_3_84-92.pdf Genetic code optimisation: Part 2] by Royal Truman and Peter Borger</ref>   

# More than 70% of Earth is covered with water, devastating flooding is frequent, and a massive ancient flood is historically recorded by every culture.  Limestone and fossils exist at the highest peaks of altitude.  Yet mammals cannot survive large floods.  It is impossible to increase the period of time to permit evolution without also increasing the likelihood of extinction of mammals due to large flooding.

# More than 70% of Earth is covered with water, devastating flooding is frequent, and a massive ancient flood is historically recorded by every culture.  Limestone and fossils exist at the highest peaks of altitude.  Yet mammals cannot survive large floods.  It is impossible to increase the period of time to permit evolution without also increasing the likelihood of extinction of mammals due to large flooding.

# Evolution cannot explain the 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>{{Cite web |date=2008-02-15 |title=Descent of Man Theory: Disproved by Molecular Biology |url=http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7 |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191106001429/http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7 |archive-date=2019-11-06 |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=godandscience.org}}</ref> Some scientists have stated that a troop of 55 chimpanzees contains more genetic diversity than the entire human race; this would support the idea that all chimps are descended from a relatively large initial population while all humans are descended from a much smaller initial population (two people, perhaps). 80% of all human diversity is found on the African continent, which accords with a human population growing from a small group in the post-Flood Middle East.[[File:Ara macao -on a small bicycle-8.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|[[Parrot]] feathers are a problem for evolutionists.  For more information, please see [https://creation.com/parrot-fashion parrot feathers].]]

# Evolution cannot explain the lack of genetic diversity among the Homo sapiens species. If evolution and the Old Earth theory were true, the human population would show a much larger genetic variance.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2008-02-15 |title=Descent of Man Theory: Disproved by Molecular Biology |url=http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7 |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191106001429/http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7 |archive-date=2019-11-06 |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=godandscience.org}}</ref> Some scientists have stated that a troop of 55 chimpanzees contains more genetic diversity than the entire human race; this would support the idea that all chimps are descended from a relatively large initial population while all humans are descended from a much smaller initial population (two people, perhaps). 80% of all human diversity is found on the African continent, which accords with a human population growing from a small group in the post-Flood Middle East.[[File:Ara macao -on a small bicycle-8.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|[[Parrot]] feathers are a problem for evolutionists.  For more information, please see [https://creation.com/parrot-fashion parrot feathers].]]

# Parsimonious repetition of design elements throughout Creation, e.g. the eye's appearance in remarkably different species.  For such complex structures to [[convergent evolution|arise repeatedly via evolution]] is [[statistical impossibility|impossible]], as evolution is an inherently random and historically contingent process.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Does Homology Provide Evidence of Evolutionary Naturalism? |url=https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evidence/does-homology-provide-evidence-of-evolutionary-naturalism/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=Answers in Genesis |language=en}}</ref>

# Parsimonious repetition of design elements throughout Creation, e.g. the eye's appearance in remarkably different species.  For such complex structures to [[convergent evolution|repeatedly arise via evolution]] is [[statistical impossibility|impossible]], as evolution is an inherently random and historically contingent process.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Does Homology Provide Evidence of Evolutionary Naturalism? |url=https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evidence/does-homology-provide-evidence-of-evolutionary-naturalism/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=Answers in Genesis |language=en}}</ref>

# ''Pleiotropy'', the fact that a change of a single gene can have several different effects, renders the "improvement" of animals by random mutation impossible, as any mutation with a potentially beneficial effect will be coupled with one or more other potentially lethal effects.<ref>{{Cite web |title=A Creationist Perspective of Beneficial Mutations in Bacteria |url=https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/mutations/a-creationist-perspective-of-beneficial-mutations-in-bacteria/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=Answers in Genesis |language=en}}</ref>

# ''Pleiotropy'', the fact that a change of a single gene can have several different effects, renders the "improvement" of animals by random mutation impossible, as any mutation with a potentially beneficial effect will be coupled with one or more other potentially lethal effects.<ref>{{Cite web |title=A Creationist Perspective of Beneficial Mutations in Bacteria |url=https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/mutations/a-creationist-perspective-of-beneficial-mutations-in-bacteria/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=Answers in Genesis |language=en}}</ref>

# The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptiles<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Martin |first=Larry D. |last2=Czerkas |first2=Stephan A. |date=2000-08 |title=The Fossil Record of Feather Evolution in the Mesozoic |url=https://academic.oup.com/icb/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/icb/40.4.687 |journal=American Zoologist |language=en |volume=40 |issue=4 |pages=687–694 |doi=10.1093/icb/40.4.687 |issn=0003-1569}}</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref>

# The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptiles<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Martin |first=Larry D. |last2=Czerkas |first2=Stephan A. |date=2000-08 |title=The Fossil Record of Feather Evolution in the Mesozoic |url=https://academic.oup.com/icb/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/icb/40.4.687 |journal=American Zoologist |language=en |volume=40 |issue=4 |pages=687–694 |doi=10.1093/icb/40.4.687 |issn=0003-1569}}</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref>

# If [[homosexuality]] were a result of genetics as many [[liberals]] claim and not [[Homosexuality and choice|a sinful choice]], then evolution should lead to the extinction of [[homosexuality]], yet to this day homosexuality exists among humans. See: [[Causes of Homosexuality|Causes of homosexuality]]

# If [[homosexuality]] were a result of genetics as many [[liberals]] claim and not [[Homosexuality and choice|a sinful choice]], then evolution should lead to the extinction of [[homosexuality]], yet to this day homosexuality exists among humans. See: [[Causes of Homosexuality|Causes of homosexuality]]

# The Theory of Evolution dictates that all organisms descended from single-celled bacteria. Considering that bacteria are, and always have been, the most successful group of organisms, covering all areas of the globe in some of the most extreme environments, why would it have been advantageous to evolve into organisms that are so much more limited to the environments they can inhabit? Surely, staying as bacteria would be far more advantageous, due to their tolerance of extreme conditions, quick reproduction time, etc.

# The Theory of Evolution dictates that all organisms descended from single-celled bacteria. Considering that bacteria are, and always have been, the most successful group of organisms, covering all areas of the globe in some of the most extreme environments, why would it have been advantageous to evolve into organisms that are so much more limited to the environments they can inhabit? Surely, staying as bacteria would be far more advantageous, due to their tolerance of extreme conditions, quick reproduction time, etc.

# Evolution cannot explain why tapeworms exist since parasitism is worse than mutual cooperation. This is because parasitism would mean they will have to destroy their host and have less opportunity to evolve while those that cooperate with other organism will evolve in much faster speed and overtake their cousins.

# Evolution cannot explain why tapeworms exist since parasitism is worse than mutual cooperation. This is because parasitism would mean they will have to destroy their host and have less opportunity to evolve while those that cooperate with other organisms will evolve in much faster speed and overtake their cousins.

# Body odor, especially during long periods of not washing in nature, can become very pungent and easily detectable by predators. At the same time, over 80% of East Asians have the ABCC11 gene, which causes the body to not produce body odor from armpits.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kuo |first=Kaiser |date=2019-07-08 |title=Why Chinese people don't need deodorant |url=https://thechinaproject.com/2019/07/08/kuora-why-chinese-people-dont-need-deodorant/ |access-date=2023-11-21 |website=The China Project |language=en-US}}</ref> There is no reason that this trait would not have been advantageous to evolve from the get-go by the first humans, or at least have spread to the other races tens of thousands of years ago in an evolutionary scenario.

# Body odor, especially during long periods of not washing in nature, can become very pungent and easily detectable by predators. At the same time, over 80% of East Asians have the ABCC11 gene, which causes the body to not produce body odor from armpits.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kuo |first=Kaiser |date=2019-07-08 |title=Why Chinese people don't need deodorant |url=https://thechinaproject.com/2019/07/08/kuora-why-chinese-people-dont-need-deodorant/ |access-date=2023-11-21 |website=The China Project |language=en-US}}</ref> There is no reason that this trait would not have been advantageous to evolve from the get-go by the first humans, or at least have spread to the other races tens of thousands of years ago in an evolutionary scenario.

# The extraordinary [[animal migration|migration]] patterns of butterflies and birds cannot be explained through naturalistic development, and lack any plausible materialistic explanation.<ref>[[Animal migration]]</ref>

# The extraordinary [[animal migration|migration]] patterns of butterflies and birds cannot be explained through naturalistic development, and lack any plausible materialistic explanation.<ref>[[Animal migration]]</ref>

# Evolutionists falsely asserted for centuries that [[corn]] evolved from teosinte, when in fact they have many fundamentally irreconcilable differences;<ref>https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1820997116</ref> there is no plausible evolutionary path of development for [[corn]].

# Evolutionists falsely asserted for centuries that [[corn]] evolved from teosinte, when in fact they have many fundamentally irreconcilable differences;<ref>https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1820997116</ref> there is no plausible evolutionary path of development for [[corn]].

# Evolution does not account for the immense amount of [[information]] in the genome. While there are various definitions of information, and many types have been observed to occur naturally, DNA contains information that is processed to lead to a result predetermined by the content of that information. Strictly speaking it is inaccurate to refer to DNA as a "code" or "language," as many scientists are prone to doing. In fact DNA is more like a template, which produces messenger RNA (mRNA,) a new template with more appropriate bases for protein production. The mRNA essentially acts as a scaffold to which the appropriate amino acids attach to form a protein molecule. Rather than being a language containing words which each have a meaning, DNA is more like a jig or framework which allows a specific molecule of mRNA, and subsequently a specific protein sequence, to be assembled on it. In effect the information is the sequence of chemical reactions which that length of DNA will catalyse. Given the huge number of useless protein molecules which could be formed and the complexity of even a simple protein such as haemoglobin, this sequence could not have evolved by natural selection as the odds against the initial organism having a functional protein are too great.

# Evolution does not account for the immense amount of [[information]] in the genome. While there are various definitions of information, and many types have been observed to occur naturally, DNA contains information that is processed to lead to a result predetermined by the content of that information. Strictly speaking, it is inaccurate to refer to DNA as a "code" or "language," as many scientists are prone to doing. In fact, DNA is more like a template, which produces messenger RNA (mRNA,) a new template with more appropriate bases for protein production. The mRNA essentially acts as a scaffold to which the appropriate amino acids attach to form a protein molecule. Rather than being a language containing words that each has a meaning, DNA is more like a jig or framework that allows a specific molecule of mRNA, and subsequently a specific protein sequence, to be assembled on it. In effect, the information is the sequence of chemical reactions which that length of DNA will catalyze. Given the huge number of useless protein molecules which could be formed and the complexity of even a simple protein such as hemoglobin, this sequence could not have evolved by natural selection as the odds against the initial organism having a functional protein are too great.

# The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptiles or any other known structure.<ref>http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/40/4/687.pdf</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref>[[File:Autumn.jpg|292px|right|thumbnail|The beauty of [[God]]'s [[creation]], such as [[autumn]] foliage, cannot adequately be explained through the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. See: [[Argument from beauty]]

# The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptiles or any other known structure.<ref>http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/40/4/687.pdf</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref>[[File:Autumn.jpg|292px|right|thumbnail|The beauty of [[God]]'s [[creation]], such as [[autumn]] foliage, cannot adequately be explained through the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. See: [[Argument from beauty]]

=== Irreducible Complexity===

=== Irreducible Complexity===

# The extraordinarily long neck of the [[giraffe]]. The giraffe's heart creates immense pressure to drive blood up the neck to the brain. Because of this there are valves in the neck which automatically restrict the blood flow when the giraffe lowers its head to drink. Without these valves the sudden increase in blood pressure as the heart no longer needs to overcome gravity would rupture the arteries in the brain and kill the giraffe. However the giraffe could not have evolved a long neck without the valves and had no need to evolve the valves unless it had a long neck. The okapi, which evolutionists claim is the closest relative of the giraffe, has no such valves. Evolutionary theory cannot explain this.<ref>[http://www1.pacific.edu/~e-buhals/GIRAFFE2.htm]</ref>[[Image:BacterialFlagellum.jpg|thumb|200px|right|[[flagellum|Bacterial Flagellum]] with rotary motor, courtesy of Access Research Network (Art Battson)]]  

# The extraordinarily long neck of the [[giraffe]]. The giraffe's heart creates immense pressure to drive blood up the neck to the brain. Because of this, there are valves in the neck that automatically restrict the blood flow when the giraffe lowers its head to drink. Without these valves, the sudden increase in blood pressure as the heart no longer needs to overcome gravity would rupture the arteries in the brain and kill the giraffe. However, the giraffe could not have evolved a long neck without the valves and had no need to evolve the valves unless it had a long neck. The okapi, which evolutionists claim is the closest relative of the giraffe, has no such valves. Evolutionary theory cannot explain this.<ref>[http://www1.pacific.edu/~e-buhals/GIRAFFE2.htm]</ref>[[Image:BacterialFlagellum.jpg|thumb|200px|right|[[flagellum|Bacterial Flagellum]] with rotary motor, courtesy of Access Research Network (Art Battson)]]  

# The development of wings in birds, as intermediary wing stubs would have no use, and be a competitive disadvantage.

# The development of wings in birds, as intermediary wing stubs would have no use, and be a competitive disadvantage.

# The [[flagellum]] of certain bacteria contain a multi-part cellular motor which fails to function if a single part is removed. This is the classic example of [[irreducible complexity]] as publicised by Professor [[Michael Behe]].<ref>[http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html]</ref> Because the flagellum must have all its parts to function it could not have evolved and therefore must have been designed by an intelligent being. At the [[Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District]] trial, Professor [[Ken Miller]] attempted to rebut this argument by pointing out that if 42 parts of the flagellum are removed what remains is a fully functional Type III Secretory System, used by some bacteria to inject toxins into target cells. While Miller's claim is factually accurate, it fails to explain how the T3SS could simultaneously add 42 parts to create a working flagellum.

# The [[flagellum]] of certain bacteria contain a multi-part cellular motor that fails to function if a single part is removed. This is the classic example of [[irreducible complexity]] as publicized by Professor [[Michael Behe]].<ref>[http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html]</ref> Because the flagellum must have all its parts to function it could not have evolved and therefore must have been designed by an intelligent being. At the [[Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District]] trial, Professor [[Ken Miller]] attempted to rebut this argument by pointing out that if 42 parts of the flagellum are removed what remains is a fully functional Type III Secretory System, used by some bacteria to inject toxins into target cells. While Miller's claim is factually accurate, it fails to explain how the T3SS could simultaneously add 42 parts to create a working flagellum.

# The organ and brain development required for retinal imagery require a base level of complexity, making a primitive form useless and impossible under evolution.<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/43/43_1/retinal_imagery.htm</ref>

# The organ and brain development required for retinal imagery requires a base level of complexity, making a primitive form useless and impossible under evolution.<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/43/43_1/retinal_imagery.htm</ref>

# The [[ear]] contains three tiny [[bone]]s that transmit sound waves from the eardrum to the cochlea.<ref>[http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bigear.html Neuroscience for Kids: The Ear]</ref>  Because of the complicated arrangement of those bones, transitional forms (which have never been found) would have served no purpose. Evolutionists claim that these bones used to form part of the reptilian jaw joint, but no intermediate fossil with half jaw/half ear has ever been found, and there is no way evolutionism can explain how a jaw becomes an ear.

# The [[ear]] contains three tiny [[bone]]s that transmit sound waves from the eardrum to the cochlea.<ref>[http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bigear.html Neuroscience for Kids: The Ear]</ref>  Because of the complicated arrangement of those bones, transitional forms (which have never been found) would have served no purpose. Evolutionists claim that these bones used to form part of the reptilian jaw joint, but no intermediate fossil with a half jaw/half ear has ever been found, and there is no way evolutionism can explain how a jaw becomes an ear.

# Bony skeletons represent an example of irreducible complexity, since only a fully formed, complete skeleton is of any use whatsoever, while having only one or some few number of bones in an otherwise invertebrate creature is hardly advantageous. It is inconceivable to think that some random mutation could have resulted in the formation of an entire bone system in a creature which was previously invertebrate.

# Bony skeletons represent an example of irreducible complexity, since only a fully formed, complete skeleton is of any use whatsoever, while having only one or some few bones in an otherwise invertebrate creature is hardly advantageous. It is inconceivable to think that some random mutation could have resulted in the formation of an entire bone system in a creature that was previously invertebrate.

# "Social insects" such as bees, ants, and termites, which have extremely complex caste systems.  Where an insect fits into the system is determined by its diet when young.  Evolution requires that the genes for the various castes and the genes for caste-specific behavior all appeared simultaneously.  Akin to the concept of [[irreducible complexity]], but on a higher (social) order, this is impossible given random chance. The complex social structure of these insects is evidence of [[intelligent design]]; also, since the overwhelming majority of individuals are workers and do not reproduce, they do not perpetuate their genetic material, as evolutionism claims all living things must do.

# "Social insects" such as bees, ants, and termites, which have extremely complex caste systems.  Where an insect fits into the system is determined by its diet when young.  Evolution requires that the genes for the various castes and the genes for caste-specific behavior all appeared simultaneously.  Akin to the concept of [[irreducible complexity]], but on a higher (social) order, this is impossible given random chance. The complex social structure of these insects is evidence of [[intelligent design]]; also, since the overwhelming majority of individuals are workers and do not reproduce, they do not perpetuate their genetic material, as evolutionism claims all living things must do.

#Lungs never would have had to develop unless the animal was already on land, in which case, they would die before reproducing.

#Lungs would never have had to develop unless the animal was already on land, in which case, they would die before reproducing.

#There is no explanation within the theory of evolution through natural selection for the mechanism in which a catapillar turns into a butterfly. Essentially the original animal is broken down and rearranged into a totally different animal, with no similar physical characteristics. This process cannot be explained within the theory, and points to a designer's involvement.

#There is no explanation within the theory of evolution through natural selection for the mechanism in which a caterpillar turns into a butterfly. Essentially the original animal is broken down and rearranged into a totally different animal, with no similar physical characteristics. This process cannot be explained within the theory, and points to a designer's involvement.

#The [[whale]] is an extraordinarily unique sea-based mammal (see diagram above right), which has no plausible evolutionary ancestor.

#The [[whale]] is an extraordinarily unique sea-based mammal (see diagram above right), which has no plausible evolutionary ancestor.

# Circadian phenomena—internal 24-hour clock mechanisms of humans and other living beings—defy material explanation.  Examples include how some people are unable to change the timing of their need for sleep for each day, and how plants exhibit clock-like behavior regardless of their exposure to sunlight.  In addition, there is a weekly clock cycle for many phenomena, which has a clear biblical basis but defies any materialistic explanation.<ref>http://www.biblestudy.org/godsrest/mysterious-seven-day-cycle-in-plants-animals-man-2.html</ref>

# Circadian phenomena—internal 24-hour clock mechanisms of humans and other living beings—defy material explanation.  Examples include how some people are unable to change the timing of their need for sleep for each day, and how plants exhibit clock-like behavior regardless of their exposure to sunlight.  In addition, there is a weekly clock cycle for many phenomena, which has a clear biblical basis but defies any materialistic explanation.<ref>http://www.biblestudy.org/godsrest/mysterious-seven-day-cycle-in-plants-animals-man-2.html</ref>

# Scientists have found proof that the first chicken came before the first egg,<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38238685/ns/technology_and_science-science/</ref> consistent with a special creation of chickens but not with a gradual descent with modifications from a proto-chicken and proto-egg.

# Scientists have found proof that the first chicken came before the first egg,<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38238685/ns/technology_and_science-science/</ref> consistent with a special creation of chickens but not with a gradual descent with modifications from a proto-chicken and proto-egg.

# Despite the large (and ever increasing) number of breeds of [[dog]]s, and the fact that some purebred lineages of dogs are reproductively isolated from other dogs, no new species of dog has evolved.<ref>https://creation.com/dogs-breeding-dogs</ref>

# Despite the large (and ever-increasing) number of breeds of [[dog]]s, and the fact that some purebred lineages of dogs are reproductively isolated from other dogs, no new species of dog has evolved.<ref>https://creation.com/dogs-breeding-dogs</ref>

# Even evolutionist studies have shown (despite the dating errors) that the vast majority of species on Earth arose around the same time and that genetic boundaries exist between the various animal kinds.<ref>Multiple references:

# Even evolutionist studies have shown (despite the dating errors) that the vast majority of species on Earth arose around the same time and that genetic boundaries exist between the various animal kinds.<ref>Multiple references:

*Hood, Marlowe (May 28, 2018). [https://phys.org/news/2018-05-gene-survey-reveals-facets-evolution.html Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution]. ''Phys.org''. Retrieved June 7, 2018.

*Hood, Marlowe (May 28, 2018). [https://phys.org/news/2018-05-gene-survey-reveals-facets-evolution.html Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution]. ''Phys.org''. Retrieved June 7, 2018.