1. The Fossil record indicates discontinuous change.
The fossil evidence supports saltationism (change by large jumps) rather than gradualism (change by an extended series of small gradual modifications). more2. Evolution is an ideological construct.
Despite its many problems and inconclusive nature, the influence of Darwin’s theory was so great, because it attempted to break man’s link with God and with creationist biology. Its effectiveness in doing this arises from its nature as an ideological construct. more3. Evolution is assumed rather than proved.
The fact that popular discussion (journals, etc..) assumes the truth of Darwinian theory has reinforced its credibility tremendously even though it is very much a theory and still very much in doubt when it comes to macroevolution. The theory of evolution deals with unique events which are unrepeatable and cannot be subjected to any sort of experimental investigation. more4. Darwinism is inadequate for Macro-evolution.
Historically, most theories that are generally thought to be true in the beginning are eventually found to be only partially true. The success of the Darwinian model of explaining microevolution is encouraging but at this time cannot adequately explain macroevolution. more5. Nature matches the Typological Model (i.e., the creationist model of kinds).
The pattern of existing nature conforms well to the typological model (the old creationist model of types or kinds of creatures). Classes are distinct, classes possess unique invariant characteristics, and we see no evidence for the sequential order to the pattern of nature required for belief in evolution. more6. Patterns in Nature do not suggest common descent.
The highly ordered pattern occurring in nature does not suggest natural descent from a common ancestor, but points toward a more hierarchic system. The branches on the tree diagram represent relationships between species, not natural evolutionary sequential arrangements. Evolutionary theory is not able to prove that natures order is sequential. more7. The Failure of Homology.
Homology, often viewed as the cornerstone of evolution, cannot be affirmed by embryological or genetic research. As knowledge has grown, common genealogy as an explanation of similarity has grown weaker. more8. The Fossil Record does not support gradualism.
However we choose to view the fossil record, it does not provide any convincing evidence of evolution or of a slow, continuous pattern. more9. The Gaps have not been bridged.
Because living organisms are amazingly complex, evolutionary theorists have not been able to adequately construct plausible transitionary organisms to reconstruct the missing links needed to prove their theory possible. more10. The Molecular Biological Revolution does not really support evolution.
Over the past 20 years, new information that has been discovered does not provide support for evolution. A very selective consideration of the evidence from molecular biology is needed to not contradict the theory of Evolution. more11. The Origin of Life is an Enigma that is not explained by evolution.
As with other complex adaptations in nature, evolution cannot provide an adequate explanation for the gradual origin of the cell. It is an excellent example of the principle that very complex systems cannot be approached gradually because the components working together are a condition to proper functioning. more12. Biochemical Studies support Typology (the creationist model of kinds).
Biochemical studies of proteins cannot adequately explain how it is possible that a uniform rate of evolution could have occurred by chance or natural selection. Despite this fact, the idea of uniform rates of evolution is presented in the literature as if it were a fact when it is not. more13. Beyond the Reach of Chance.
The Darwinian claim that all of nature results from a random search has been shown to be highly improbable. more14. The Puzzle of Perfection.
Throughout history, there have always been a number of respected professionals who have not believed that complex adaptations could be explained by chance evolutionary processes. Advances in biological research have revealed natural processes so complex, amazing, and awesome that it is unlikely that even in millions of years a random, chance process could have developed them. more15. The Priority of the Evolutionary Paradigm.
Although the theory of evolution cannot be proven, its secular emphasis has greatly influenced western society. In practice, the Evolutionary paradigm has priority over the evidence. I.e., the paradigm is often permitted to ride rough-shod over evidence that does not support it. more