Skeptics, Where Is Your Evolution History?

Here's my refutation from last time that you ignored:

[quote]Einstein's general theory of relativity has even less history recorded than evolution. So what? Are you suggesting that is somehow evidence against Einstein's general theory of relativity?

BTW, China has 5000 years of written history, with no mention of your "Moses" or "Jesus" people. What does that prove about "Moses" and "Jesus"? Nothing, right? So why should a lack of mention be so significant??[/quote]

Below is my response to your previous video, which you ignored. Since you failed to respond to it, it is still true, and your silly claims are myths.

[quote]Since the video itself was too long for the opposing team to bear[/quote] You neglected to mention the fact that the video was in Russian and none of us could understand a word of it. Just the sort of case-weakening thing you'd forget to mention.
[quote]Ахиллесовы пяты эволюции
[Рекомендуем включить субтитры (кнопка справа внизу видео), чтобы видеть перевод экранных текстов][/quote]
https://similarworlds.com/spirituality/4319062-Evolutions-Achilles-Heels?sort=1

Wow, they found 15 PhD scientists who rejected "evolutionary theory," but they didn't say what subject their PhDs were in! The USA has over 3 million PhDs, so it looks like it's 15 vs 3 million, LOL!!!

"We asked each scientist what is the worst thing evolution has to handle in your discipliine?" So we're already granting that evolution explains 99.9999% of observations. That's good. Do you offer any other testable theory with a 99.9999% success rate? I didn't think so. Sorry, there's always going to be a little weirdness out there, mistakes in record keeping, mistakes in measurement, typos.

Truth is, in science, if you want to reject a testable theory that's 99.9999% successful, you need to offer a testable theory with a better than 99.9999% success rate. And you ain't got one.

But this video doesn't offer any such testable theory. Instead, it sets up a giant strawman fallacy; the fallacy that any testable scientific theory needs to be perfect. Sorry, dudes, perfection is not how science works. Not even with the so-called "Law" of Gravity.

David Catchpoole says, in the video, that "natural selection can only operate on what is existing, and it can only operate to [i]remove[/i] what is existing." That's DEAD WRONG.

The quote clip from John Sanford says essentially that information is complicated; but makes no points and draws no conclusions. I wonder why they included it??

Then the two dudes go on to claim that science says "the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution." That claim, too, is DEAD WRONG. It's a giant strawman fallacy within the overall strawman fallacy.

OK, ten minutes in when they bring up the holocaust I bailed out. I didn't pursue any details of how they tried to blame Nazism on Darwin; sorry dude, I've found enough holes already without engaging with that steaming truckload of bull excrement.

So called "creation science" is NOT testable, not falsifiable. So called "creation science" essentially says "whatever you measure, whatever you observe, God made it that way." Such a theory can't be falsified, so it's not in the realm of science. Want another non-testable non-falsifiable "theory"? Check out the Flying Spaghetti Monster. FSM theory says whatever you measure or observe, the FSM reached out with a noodly appendage and made it look that way. FSM "theory" thus explains everything just as well as "creation science" does. Thus it deserves equal standing with "creation science" yet your video never once mentions the AmAzInG 100% success rate of FSM "theory," [b]LOL!!![/b]