There is a common misperception that critics of Darwianian evolution are anti-science.  Ironically, the pro-Darwinian forces do the same thing they falsely accuse their critics of.  They demonize their opponents and avoid fair debates.  Just watch what has happened to the Kansas School Board.  What is wrong with a fair debate about weaknesses of Darwinian evolution? 

You can’t have an productive discussion on evolution without defining which kind of evolution you are talking about: General evolution (“we see that things change over time”), micro-evolution (changes occur within species – e.g., dog breeding, finch beaks) or macro-evolution (life arising from non-life and evolving from tiny organisms into all the species we see today). There is ample evidence for general and micro-evolution. They are fully compatible with the Bible.

Darwin demonstrated micro-evolution. However, there is no evidence for the beginning of macro-evolution nor for the transitions from one species to another. Most of the evidence put forth in the 20th century (such as "Nebraska man") was mistaken or fraudulent. The Cambrian Explosion and other fossil evidence actually militate against macro-evolution. Species appear fully formed in the fossil record. Transitional fossils – which should number in the millions, showing innumerable slight changes – simply do not exist. These criticisms of macro-evolution (aka Darwinian evolution) are typically not taught in schools because of the dogma of the scientists in charge of the microphones.

Darwinian evolution is crumbling. Which side will you be on? The side that tried to prop it up, despite the evidence against it, or the side that helped expose the truth?

Who are the ones that truly believe by blind faith?  Evolutionists believe not only that something came from nothing, but that everything came from nothing.  They also believe that life came from non-life (i.e., chemicals that appeared from nothing somehow merged together and started living).  There is no evidence for this in the fossil record!

Darwinists often tip their hand.  Consider this quote from Richard Dawkins, a leading evolutionist: "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." 

How does he know they weren't designed?  Abiogenesis is a biological term meaning that life developed spontaneously from non-life.   Yet this has never been proven. 

Romans 1:18-20 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Resources

• Strengths & Weaknesses

• Center for Science & Culture

• True Origins
• Answers In Genesis
• Five Questions a Darwinist Would Rather Dodge
• Texans for Better Science Education

• Institute for Creation Research

• Answers in Creation