The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of Biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law was wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. (I go some stuff proving evolution is false and impossible). The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is called a theory instead of a law.

Evolutionists have never found the missing links. Each time they annouce finding one it is later proven to be false. They claim sciencetific support when none exists.

Don't believe your biology science text book. Biologiests keep revising science taht was supposed to be scienctifically fact.

Why would you believe evolution when it ahs many errors?

Misright,


I don't know why you are going but what are these challenges that the Theory Of Evolution fail to meet? Please state real scientific questions that is not answered yet by biologist,chemist and physicist.I would like to know how you would prove that creation happened,please don't give me "I believe it" answer.

misright:

[s]The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of Biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law was wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. (I go some stuff proving evolution is false and impossible). The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is called a theory instead of a law.[/s]

Wrong. all wrong.

Evolutionists have never found the missing links. Each time they annouce finding one it is later proven to be false. They claim sciencetific support when none exists.

Missing link for what?

Don't believe your biology science text book. Biologiests keep revising science taht was supposed to be scienctifically fact.

Yeah, not being dogmatic is a terrible thing. By the way, the fact hasn't been changed

Why would you believe evolution when it ahs many errors?

Why would you expect anyone to believe your post when it has many errors? Not that the two are analogous.

Sigh, not again. This subject has been beaten to death on this board and there are still so many people who don't get it.
Have a look at these threads:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-6208.0.html
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-5432.32.html
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-11284.480.html

misright:

The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of Biology.

Indeed it isn't. Laws are descriptive and theories are explanative. Please read this essay by Stephen J. Gould, it's very insightful.

misright:
A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law was wrong.

By it's descriptive nature it must indeed be % correct. The same principle of falsification applies to theories as well. Scientific theories are only provisionally correct and the strength of a theory lies in it's predictive value. The TOE is a very strong theory with a high predictive value. There are currently no alternatives to the TOE, as those opposing schools of thought (calling them theories is giving them too much credit) cannot be falsified in principle. E.g. there is no data that can possibly falsify Intelligent Design, therefore, it is not science.
You can read about the scientific method on wikipedia. Do focus your research on the principle of falsifiability as proposed by Popper

misright:
This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. (I go some stuff proving evolution is false and impossible).

Well, then you're in for a Nobel Prize, no one has been able to do that yet, so go ahead, present your challenges and proofs, but read Talkorigin's Index to Creationist Claims first in order not to propose already refuted challenges to the TOE

misright:
The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is called a theory instead of a law.

Of course it won't but not because of what you say. Theories serve different purposes from laws

misright:

Evolutionists have never found the missing links. Each time they annouce finding one it is later proven to be false. They claim sciencetific support when none exists.

Please, what is that infamous missing link? Who exactly announced finding that missing link you are talking about and when? What do you mean by claiming scientific support where none exists? It seems you're talking straight out of your neck, why don't you substantiate your misguided innuendo?

misright:

Don't believe your biology science text book. Biologiests keep revising science taht was supposed to be scienctifically fact.

If you would know anything about the scientific method, you wouldn't be asserting such blatant nonsense.

misright:

Why would you believe evolution when it ahs many errors?

Which errors does the TOE have? Name one.

Before you continue making a fool of yourself, please familiarise yourself with the subject you're trying to critique. You could start with the basic introduction at Berkeley University. At least you'll know what you're talking about.

One might submit that anything that is formulated by humans is fraught with error and due to failure because humans, de facto, are imperfect, themselves. 

If that should be the case, then would not organized religion fall into the same category?   Surely, it, too, would be flawed, would it not?

@nferyn, mrmayor & KAG:
BRAVO!!  Please, I implore that you continue posting!  It is imperative that clear, critical thinking be known.

drrionelli:

One might submit that anything that is formulated by humans is fraught with error and due to failure because humans, de facto, are imperfect, themselves.

If that should be the case, then would not organized religion fall into the same category? Surely, it, too, would be flawed, would it not?

@nferyn, mrmayor & KAG:
BRAVO!! Please, I implore that you continue posting! It is imperative that clear, critical thinking be known.

My experience of the critics of evolution on this forum is that they are seldom prepared to review or study the material they are referred to. This is a disgrace. It is incalculable how religious dogma addles the mind.

tpaine:

My experience of the critics of evolution on this forum is that they are seldom prepared to review or study the material they are referred to. This is a disgrace. It is incalculable how religious dogma addles the mind.

My experience of the critics of christianity on this forum is that they are NEVER prepared to review or study the bible verses they are referred to. This is a disgrace. It is incalculable how atheistic dogma beclouds the mind.

Evolution is a religion. Evolutionary scientists are priests and pastors of this religion.

We are supposed to READ one or two documents and BELIEVE that they explain things that happened over 60 million years ago and beyond.

We need a lot of faith for this exercise.