re: #84 Colère Tueur de Lapin

More importantly, evolutionary biologists don’t revere Darwin. They recognize his contribution to science, and as you note, he wasn’t the only biologist who was toying with the hypothesis of natural selection leading to new species.

The anti-science creationists, intelligent design, Zork makes with playdoh, etc. that ambasting Darwin as some kind of “gotcha” are projecting their belief that damaging Darwin, then a miracle occurs, natural selection and evolution are no longer viable theories. Just like creationism fails without a supreme creator. Science don’t work that way.

Frequently, creationists argue against the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection as if, it was debunked, that means God is True.

Aside from the fact that if everything about evolution is wrong that doesn’t mean Godidit, a whole lot of religious people (and not just creationists) conflate “evolution” with “atheism.” Thus, if you were to debunk evolution, you also debunk atheism.

Moreover, you debunk evolution by promoting a better hypothesis which explains all the facts, leaves none out, and can be used to make better predictions. A proper debunk of evolution would be something like “here are a bunch of facts which evolution cannot explain, and the theory cannot be adjusted to accommodate them; here is an alternative testable hypothesis which accommodates these facts.”