Are You a Darwinist?

  I am beginning to become increasingly irritated by modern sciences willingness to defy logical thinking when it discuses the origins of life. The more I read and study, the more I am convinced that macroevolution is a complete farce.  Logic defies science when applied to the "theories" of evolution.  Those who ascribe to the teachings of Darwin seem to align themselves with the religion of atheism and do so at their own peril.  In fact, if Darwin were alive today, he would throw out his theories as being preposterous in light of the advances of technology today.  Cross mutation of species is not observable, never has been and never will be.  Without it, macroevolution is un-provable and needs to be abandoned.  The more likely answer to the "origin of species" is that life was created.

   This is not to say that evolution per say is to be abandoned.  Microevolution is observable and does take place.  Bacteria become resistant to antibiotics, plant species adapt to their environments, etc.   But to say that a fish can somehow become a bird is not only preposterous, but a complete lie at worst or fairytale at best.  Some would argue that the fossil record shows this transformation.  But according to Henry Gee, chief science writer for Nature, “To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”  Why can't science in general come to grips with the impossibility of these theories?  Maybe it's because the idea of a creator is implausible to those who have set up man as the ultimate authority on life.