Chris Hyland
Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
Over at , UD Dembski wasn't sure whether the paper he linked to was an ID article or not. I can sympathise, becuase it's quite hard to decide what and what does not count as an antievolutionary paper since every creationist has a different definition of what 'Darwinism' is. So out of the kindness of my heart I've put together this handy list of anti-Darwinian papers in mainstream journals that should satisfy creationists of all stripes.
To find the right paper for you, read the list of statements about evolution in descending order. If you don't think that the statement applies to Darwinism, then keep going down the list, but if you think it does, then click on the link to find a bonafide mainstream article which knocks your straw man to pieces. Enjoy!
1.Random mutation has to refer to mutation in DNA.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
2.Random mutation has to refer to mutation in protein coding sequence.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
3.Random mutation of DNA can only act on single bases.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
4.Random mutation means that at a particular time every nucleotide in the entire genome has an equal probability of a mutation.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
5.New genes have to arise randomly from DNA sequence.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
6.Gene duplications always occur one at a time.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
7.Genomes of populations can only change due to natural selection.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
8.Every feature of an organism is a trait which has selectable value otherwise it couldn't have evolved.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
9.Environmental conditions can't affect the phenotype and/or the genotype.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
10.Random mutation/natural selection means that all new features of organisms must arise due to new genes and not new interactions between existing genes.
Yes.
No. Go to next statement.
11.Only immediately useful mutations can participate in the evolution of complex systems.
Yes.
No. Oh go on then.
|
