Why Darwinism Is Unscientific

A common misconception about evolution, is that it's an observed fact in nature. When Darwin first proposed natural selection, he believed it could allow new species. The media bias is an oxygen tent for evolution. It is directly tied to racism and inspires Nazism. I will go into detail about this in other articles. The point of this article is to prove it is unscientific. PLEASE, write a comment which contains any 'proof' evolutionists use, and I will refute it here.

1) Natural selection does not bring new species

You pack a group of people under the Sun, two white, and two black. Who is more likely to survive? The black people. Why? UV protection. So under the hot sun, the black people are more likely to survive. Therefore, the people in Africa are now black. Ok, if that explains how they are black, does it explain black people growing extra arms and making new species? Nope.

"The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well."
(Stephen Jay Gould, «The Return of Hopeful Monsters», Natural History, Vol 86, July-August 1977, p. 28)

2) No mutation to date has been seen in humans which has added to the information in a genome. Mutations only damage DNA.

Yup, countless experiments, not a single one.

Here's a quote:

"And certainly, there's no doubt about it, that in the past, and I think also in the present, for many evolutionists, evolution has functioned as something with elements which are, let us say, akin to being a secular religion ... And it seems to me very clear that at some very basic level, evolution as a scientific theory makes a commitment to a kind of naturalism.."
(Michael Ruse, «Nonliteralist Antievolution», AAAS Symposium: «The New Antievolutionism, » February 13, 1993, Boston, MA)

3) Fossil record.

Let's take turtles for example. Their shells are perfect. Perfect for nature I mean. I know we can just remove the turtles and eat em (mean I know, but tasty).
Anyway, hate to go off-topic. An evolutionist would tell you the turtles evolved. This would mean that in the past, we would find fossils that show the various stages of turtle evolution. We don't. But that's not the best part, they have a turtle fossil in Converse County, Wyoming, USA, from the Cretaceous period aged 95 million years old, exactly how it looks today, no sign of changes/evolution!


That's the fossil. The soft part's decayed pretty much (or maybe they ate it).

Here's a live specimen:




But perhaps the best example of a fossil that proves creation, is the eye of a trilobite! The trilobite fossil is aged 380 million years old.

Quotes first, pics later.

"David Raup, a professor of geology from Harvard, Rochester and Chicago universities, says: "the trilobites 450 million years ago used an optimal design which would require a well trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today."
David Raup, "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology," Bulletin, Field Museum of Natural History, Vol. 50, January 1979, p. 24

". . . I cannot doubt that all the Silurian trilobites have descended from some one crustacean, which must have lived long before the Silurian age, and which probably differed greatly from any known animal . . . Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian stratum was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian age to the present day; and that during these vast, yet quite unknown, periods of time, the world swarmed with living creatures. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer [but we can]."
Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, 1859, pp. 313-314


"The above fossils are trilobites, some of the highly complex invertebrates that appeared suddenly in the Cambrian Period, some 500 million years ago. The most significant feature in trilobites, and one that represents a major quandary for evolutionists, is their compound eyes. These eyes, which are highly advanced and complex, possess a multi-cell system. This system is identical to that found in modern spiders, bees, flies and other creatures. The fact that such a complex structure emerged abruptly in creatures living 500 million years ago demolishes evolutionist claims based on the idea of coincidence."
(Source: HarunYahya)
Bannedforyoursins Bannedforyoursins
70+, M
Jan 6, 2013