> SCIENTISTS PICK HOLES IN DARWIN MOTH THEORY
>
>
> Some fear that the new theories will be seized on by creationists to
> fuel "sensationalist" claims questioning all evidence for Darwin.
> Richard Dawkins, the professor of the public understanding of science at
> Oxford University and author of The Selfish Gene, said: "The details of
> any experiments done 40 years ago are bound to be vulnerable to detailed
> criticism. But, in any case, nothing momentous hangs on these
> experiments."
It was obvious from the start that Evolutionists were trying to present the
peppered Moths as something that they weren't. The story even as normally
told
is not the kind of change that can add up and turn a monkey into a man.
Now, with
the revelations of errors made by Evolutionists concerning the peppered
moths, we
have yet another example of how Evolutionists create "just so" stories with
little
regard for reality or science. If they can't get a living textbook example
right,
how are we to trust them with bone fragments dug up from the ground?
What makes this whole debate so silly is that Evolutionists are interested
in making up
myths, not in science. To them, "Science" is only a false appeal to
authority.
Get back to me when Evolutionists come up with an mechanism that can be
observed to
indefinitely create complexity in a closed system. Until the time that such
a mechanism
is found, "evolution" is a concept foreign to science.
BTW, real science stands up to time -- there is no 40 year limit of
reliability.
Today's Evolutionist beliefs will be 40-years-old in 40 years. If history
is
any track record, get an early start and just assume that all their stories
are
false. Even Gould knows that Time is the enemy of Evolution stories.