[Masoom]

Avoiding Difficult Questions If you are going to reply to 15 questions regarding a thesis you oppose, then you will be expected to deal with each one in a tangible manner. If, on the other hand, you come up with imaginary questions and waste time with the answers to them, then your readers will naturally come to doubt your credibility. Avoiding getting to grips with the real questions is a sign that you are trying to deceive yourself or your readers. Scientific American's "15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense" is just such an example of "avoiding the truth." Right from the start, a number of those questions reveal that this is what is going on: "Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law." "Evolution is unscientific, because it is not testable or falsifiable. It makes claims about events that were not observed and can never be re-created." "If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" None of the above are objections expressed by critics of the theory of evolution. Everyone who offers serious criticism knows what the concept of "theory" actually means, and accepts that scientific research into events in the past cannot be carried out by means of observation and recreation. In the same way, no scientists who seriously criticize the Darwinist thesis as regards the origin of man would ever offer such a ridiculous objection as "If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" John Rennie, the author of the article, should no doubt be well aware of this. Yet the way that he puts the above three statements forward as "creationist objections" and imagines that he has given satisfactory replies to them shows that he is "tilting at windmills." If he really wants to "reply to the creationists" then he needs to reply to such real questions as how it is that nearly all animal phyla suddenly appeared in the Cambrian without any trace of evolutionary ancestors; why not one example of a mutation that developed the genetic information of living things has ever been encountered; or why no trace has been found of the billions of intermediate form fossils that Darwin anticipated. The truth about the questions that Rennie has tried to reply to, most of which can again be seen as "easy questions," is set out below.

Harun Yahya - Articles - Scientific American's 15 Errors