Evolution's False Doctrines: i.e. Punctuated Equilibrium Etc.

[mark kennedy]

Darwinian evolution: +200.000 peer reviewed scientific publications
Post flood hyper evolution: 0 papers

I'ld say "advantage, darwin", but really... it is "game, set, match... darwin". And it's been like that for over 150 years now.

No one writes papers on Darwinism and they certainly won't find a credible scientific model. Mendelian genetics is sufficient to support a young earth scenerio and bothing could support Darwinian scenerios except blind faith in natural elementals.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No one writes papers on Darwinism and they certainly won't find a credible scientific model. Mendelian genetics is sufficient to support a young earth scenerio and bothing could support Darwinian scenerios except blind faith in natural elementals.

Of course there are no papers on "Darwinism" . That is an unscientific creationist term. Guess what? You won't find any scientific papers on Einsteinism either.

As to a young Earth, that concept can be refuted by middle school students.

 

[tas8831]

Mendelian genetics is sufficient to support a young earth scenerio and bothing could support Darwinian scenerios except blind faith in natural elementals.

Cool unsupported assertion.

Please explain, and provide evidence for, the Mendelian mechanism that allows for the production of 1000 species of bat in less than a few thousand years.

 

[DogmaHunter]

No one writes papers on Darwinism and they certainly won't find a credible scientific model. Mendelian genetics is sufficient to support a young earth scenerio and bothing could support Darwinian scenerios except blind faith in natural elementals.

I'm gonna look past the ridiculous terminology you used and just say this:

If you are seriously going to claim that there are no peer reviewed scientific publications on evolution theory, I'm just going to point and laugh.