For most Darwinists, evolution is an article of faith. They believe with an almost Pentecostal passion that man must be descended from some sort of monkey. The thought that they might be wrong sets them into a head-butting fury.
And most of them are simply hopeless when it comes to defending their position. They can't offer a cogent explanation of exactly what it is they do believe, let alone defeat even the most basic arguments against evolution.
On the face of it, looking at evolution from Darwin's time, it looks reasonable. The beginning of the Industrial Revolution and the rise of Rationalism seemed to require God's dismissal, so what would be better than to show by induction that Man had to be descended from 'lesser' primates?
Reasonable, perhaps, but when you look closely at what evolution requires to work in a robust and internally consistent manner, it breaks down like a poorly-maintained Yugo.
First, and very first, life had to start somewhere. So, let's start with a "primordial soup" of organic molecules. We need to kick-start life, though, so let's throw in a lightning bolt. Or a cosmic ray.
This has been done in the laboratory. Scientists turned organic molucules into different organic molecules. Yee-ha.
Well, say the Big Heads, this process has to happen very many times to really get anywhere. And, of course, all of the changes would have to be beneficial.
All of them. And in the proper order. And there could be no changes allowed that would retard evolution.
Statistically, this is less likely than my being mistaken for Sandra Bullock. But for the evolutionists, it is an article of faith. This statistically impossible daisy chain is never questioned.
Not questioned, but sometimes modified. It's been seriously suggested that life on Earth was introduced by aliens. (And where did they come from?)
We have to have literally billions of changes in the root DNA to go from the Ooze to the Us. Carl Sagan thought cosmic ray mutation was responsible.
But, you might ask, aren't most mutations detrimental, and don't many of them result in sterility?
Yes, Sagan said, but in this case everything worked perfectly. The changes were neutral or beneficial, and the species-killing mutations never happened.
If we sweep that under the rug, and fast-forward to Man and Monkeys, we also run into some problems. Sure, the DNA is almost identical...but so is the DNA of a Chihuahua and a Great Dane. A Great Dane is not a Chihuahua. Period.
Also, there is absolutely no sign that any of the primates have developed an organized society, much less any sort of spiritual outlook. We communicate with each other, and try to communicate with animals...but it doesn't go the other way.They don't try to meet us. No animal does.
We are, for better or worse, unique. We came from somewhere, and the only reasonable assumption is that we were designed.
And design needs a designer. Not a Monkey's Uncle.