Darwinism Under the Microscope: How Recent Scientific Evidence Points to Divine Design

Jim, Your ignorance is only exceeded by your arrogance. You claim "arguing about "Darwinism" is ridiculous at this point." Why are you censoring the debate from this book? The book points out scientific evidence against evolution, so how can you say there is none? Do your research on the Anthropic Principle, the lack of fossil evidence supporting evolution, the Cambrian explosion, irreducible complexity, and origins of life, then you will see there is plenty of scientific evidence against evolution.

Hey Jim, Opinions are great! And yours is just adorable. Evolution is a belief which takes more faith than creationism to believe. You say "facts are facts" while the evolution cornerstone belief of human existance beginning 200+ million years ago is based on an assumption(!) that the African ape and the human race have a common ancestor 5 million years ago. Wow. What a belief. Have you even studied anything since 1997? What do you think 'mitochondrial Eve' is all about? Amazing how it's so closely dated to the Biblical Eve, eh? Also, the fossil record! The fossil record is perfectly consistent with sudden creation if one does not assume (which will be hard since it's the golden rule of evolution) uniformitarianism and evolution to start with. The whole reason the theory of punctuated equilibrium was invented was because the fossil record was more consistent with sudden creation than gradual evolution; evolutionists needed an excuse for it. Darwin himself, about 150 years ago, predicted, in his book, that if his theory were true, there should be innumerable fossil creatures in the ground showing the change from one form of organism to another. To him, the fossil record should be full of smooth transitions and transitional forms. But even in his time no such smooth transitions were found. Instead, even up until now, the fossil record is known to show abrupt appearance of animals, which stay generally the same before disappearing the same way they appeared. That is known as stasis. "blah, blah, blah... has evolved over billions of years from simpler forms." Ok- for the sake of your argument we'll pretend that is true... now: were did those simpler forms originate? Something cannot be created out of nothing no matter how many years back you want it to go. The theory also states that the universe is eternal... eternal is largely correlated to time, therefore it cannot be used to describe something that is not affected by time. Matter is affected by time, so that something that has always existed must not be matter. It is immaterial, for matter would surely decay and cease to exist. Hmm, how bout that. "if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." - Darwin (Origin of Species, 6th ed. (1988), p. 154) Educate yourself on irreducible complexity, then study the flagellum. Or even study the bombardier beetle, which could not have possebly evolved into its current state without blowing itself up in the process. I hope you someday have the honor of meeting Mr.Gills or Mr.Woodward so you may explain to them your great and magnificant insight. Note: You're a Christian (non-ignoramus of course!) yet you believe the theory of evolution, which is opposed to the Bible. Well how about that. Evolution is also rasist due to Darwin's reasoning that the 'white race' is superior to the 'black race' because of the latte

I skimmed this. It seemed to have a very good overview of current findings in various fields of science that either point toward intelligent design or against evolution. It has an extensive, annotated bibliography of very recent books for further reading.