[Skyceman]

It is supported by ample scientific evidence, and people who don't believe in it are by and large crackpots.

I'm a crackpot then because I don't believe in it. There are far too many holes in Evolutionary theory to trust it.

Here's a small clip from an article written in the Herald doubting the theory:

At the 1966 Wistar Institute Symposium, Sir Peter Medawar expressed this widespread skepticism on behalf of an imposing assembly of scientists. The fantastical idea that all life began from non-life, then evolved by gradual random mutation and natural selection from a single-celled common ancestor into complex higher life forms, has fallen on hard times.

Molecular biologist Michael Denton spoke for many scientists in his lucid Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, when he wrote that "ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is . . . the great cosmogenic myth of the 20th century." A pseudo-scientific Genesis story that presents God as a blind process instead of a willful creator. Well, the reputational fur -- uh, feathers -- are flying.

And yet the broader public is largely unaware of this bitter dispute. Museums and textbooks continue to display standard models of, for example, the famous "horse sequence" (tiny weird horse transforms into normal big horse over millennia). But Dr. Niles Eldredge, a curator of the American Museum of Natural History, said: "It (the horse sequence) has been presented as the literal truth in textbook after textbook " and complained that this is "speculative," and "lamentable." Meaning, possibly a lie.

The public also believes all critics of evolution theory are religious nuts, when in fact the main thrust of criticism comes from a variety of fields within science itself, mostly from agnostics doubting Darwin as much as God.

Some argue that even the basic idea of gradual evolution is self-defeating because if species depend on optimal adaptation for survival, then anything on the way to becoming optimal couldn't survive to adapt, could it?

And then, there's the problem of simultaneity. The evolution of interactive parts of organisms (the iris, the cornea, the eyelid flap, say) would all have to change at once. How could a blind process orchestrate such harmony?

There is no good answer. That's why Darwin himself said that "the human eye, to this day, gives me a cold shudder," and, "the sight of a feather in a peacock's tail . . . makes me sick."