One of the things that annoys me about the whole Theory of Evolution & Creationism/ID topic that Creationists and ID proponents always repeat the same old silly arguments. You know the sort I mean; appeals to a misunderstanding of the Laws of Thermodynamics, the ‘which is easier to believe’ fallacy and so on. Of course, if you fail to address these rather silly claims then they take at as some sort of victory in a way that can often seem like a war of attrition.
Maybe it is time for those of us who are actually somewhat aware of the evidence and facts to save ourselves some trouble. Perhaps we should start a collection of these tired old arguments and place a rebuttal underneath, so all we need do is copy and paste. You see someone bring out the ol’ (and rather silly) “the Grand Canyon was formed in a global flood” line, you just copy and paste the rebuttal instead of wasting time typing up a unique reply each and every time. I’ll try to start some off, people can just add more in the comments section.
The Laws of Thermodynamics/Entropy make the Theory of Evolution impossible
Appeal to a misunderstanding of the Laws of Thermodynamics. These laws apply to what is known as closed systems, which organic life certainly is not. A person can refute this argument simply by looking in a mirror; you were once a much simpler form of life and have since changed into a much more complex one. If this argument were true, you would never have become more than a small puddle of liquid and maybe not even that. To state it another way, overall entropy can increase in a closed system and undoubtedly will yet there is nothing stopping localised pockets (such as planets, galaxies and so on) becoming more ordered.
Which is Easier to believe? A creator being or that your ancestors will monkeys/rodents/jellyfish?
Just because you find something easier to believe, it does not make it true. Primitive man believed such things as the Sun was pushed along the sky by a giant Dung Beetle or that Demons caused mental illness. Why? Simply because it was easier for them and it was what they could comprehend. Likewise, I might believe that my car is run through the power of Leprechauns because I do not have a full understanding of automotive mechanics but that does not make it true.
No Transitional Fossils have ever been found.
It could be argued that every fossil ever found is a transitionary fossil, since it belongs to a species that was once one species and is continuing on to be another species. Examples of found transitionary fossils (apart from human remains) include Haasiophis terrasanctus, Pachyrhachis, Mososaurs, Pezosiren portelli, Runcaria and Halkiera just to name a few. The fossil record of whale evolution is also rather complete, including the movement of the blow-hole and the recession of hind legs.
Evolution has never been observed.
Evolution has been observed many times across many different species. Evolution happens with a lot of little changes over almost geological amounts of time. You could never expect, for example, a dog turn into a horse in a labratory. That being said, new species have been observed and verified. A new species of mosquito evolved from an old one in the London Underground, The apple maggot fly, Faeroe Island House mouse, Goatsbeard Wildflowers and so on. The examples of new species emerging are many indeed.
Evolution is not science as it can not be observed, falsified and/or measured.
Evolution has been observed many times across a wide number of species and forms of life; from bacteria changing to better resist drugs and new environments, insects developing and losing physical attributes, the different breeds of dogs and general genetic change that can be seen all the time. Evolution can falsified very simply; Darwin himself even penned things would destroy his theory if they were ever found. Such finds include such things as irreducible complexity and (as the old saying goes) rabbit fossils in the pre-cambian.
Evolution is only a theory.
The Theory of Evolution is a scientific theory, which is somewhat different to how the term ‘theory’ is often used in wider society. In science, the term refers to “a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena” to put it rather simply. Scientific theories need to meet certain criteria to be considered as such; being observable, testable and so on. Scientific theories must undergo rigorous testing and verification which is what the Theory of Evolution has passed time and again. There is no ‘heirachy of truth’, a scientific theory is not worth less than a ‘law’.
Please note that I’ve start up the ‘arguments response’ page (just take a look at the top of this page for the tab).