What are the real examples to prove the viewpoint of evolution?

As the British scientist Chandra Wickramasinghe said, "There is no evidence to support the basic principles of Darwin's theory of evolution. This is just a social driving force that swept the world in 1860, but it has caused great disasters to the scientific community since then. "

According to New Scientist magazine, "More and more scientists, especially those who believe in evolution, point out that Darwin's theory of evolution is not a real scientific theory at all. Many critics are authoritative scholars. "

Dr. karl popper said: "I have come to the conclusion that Darwin's idea is not a scientific theory that can be tested, but a metaphysical research plan."

Washburne, a professor of anthropology, said: "Everything about evolution is very speculative."

The Chicago Field Museum newspaper said: "Darwin's theory has always been considered to be closely related to fossil evidence. Most people may also think that the arguments supporting Darwin's biological evolution mainly come from fossils. Unfortunately, this view is not correct. Neither the geological records found then nor now can prove that organisms evolved gradually through a series of slow and gradual processes. Expect the unexpected, where species appeared in the biological history, showed no signs of change in the records, or only a few, and then suddenly disappeared from the records. In addition, it is often unclear whether the next generation can really adapt to the environment better than the previous generation, but in fact it is rarely clear. In other words, progress in biological structure is very rare. " (Vol. 50,No. 1, pp. 22-23)

Jonathan Wells, a biologist, wrote after examining the evidence provided by the fossil record: "At the level of boundaries, phylum and class, it is obviously not the fact that creatures have the same ancestor and gradually evolved. Judging from the evidence presented by fossil records and molecular structure, evolution is untenable. "

Geneticist stebbins wrote: "At present, there is no transitional type between plants and animals. There are deep trenches between various types of creatures. " The process of biological evolution, page 147. "In fact," the new evolutionary timetable says, "the fossil record can't even provide a clear transition chain between different species."

Harold Coffin, a vertebrate zoologist, said: "Obviously, there have been many adaptations, but did this adaptation really make a large group of organisms evolve into another group? The evidence from science does not support such a change. "

Researchers often use some fossil records to prove the authenticity of evolution, but even these fossil records often cause controversy. For example, when talking about the fossils of fish and amphibians, the biologist Malcolm S. Gordon said that the fossils found were not representative enough, "it is unlikely to reflect the diversity of these two creatures in those years. We can't know whether there is a correlation between the creatures shown in the fossils and whether they are related to later creatures. " -biology and philosophy, 340 pages.

"Taking out a series of fossils and claiming that the creatures displayed by fossils are related is not a verifiable scientific hypothesis, but a wishful thinking. Its credibility is equivalent to a bedtime story. Although it is beautiful and perhaps educational, it does not conform to science. " -Exploring ancient times-Putting down fossil records and heading for a new life history, page116-117, by Henry Gee.

Francis Hitching, a scientist, wrote: "If you look for the connection between various animals, you will find that there is no such connection at all. Surprisingly, fossil loopholes are very regular: fossils are gone in all important links. " -Giraffe's neck

"The more people study fossils, the more certain they are that evolution is only based on confidence." Scientist L.T. Moore

"I found that the situation was completely different from what we were led to believe. The evidence supporting evolution is either too little or too insignificant to prove such a complicated theory of the origin of life. " Scientist T.H. Janabi

Norman Macbeth, a lawyer from Harvard, said: "In terms of evolution; Most of the explanations are lackluster. In fact, they are hardly qualified to be called explanations; They are just proposals, speculations and fantasies, and they are not worthy of being called theories at all. "

Michael Denton, a molecular biologist, said in his book Evolution-A Theory in Crisis: "Since Darwin's theory has become an axiom, there is no need to prove it. Thanks to Darwin's efforts, the real problems raised in the Origin of Species and the loopholes in the theory of evolution have been ignored. People who follow Darwin's theory hardly mention these key issues, only one sentence "natural selection" explains how organisms form extremely complex adaptations, without even the slightest doubt. Because the fallacy of evolution is unfathomable, people mistakenly think that evolution is a theory that was proved to be correct a hundred years ago. Nothing is more ridiculous than this misunderstanding. " Page 77.

"Theories related to evolution are influential in all disciplines unrelated to biology; In this respect, no theory can be compared with evolution. This case illustrates how an idea that is completely out of conjecture and has no scientific basis prevails, how to dominate the ideological trend of the whole society, and even control the face of an era. " -Evolution.-Theory in crisis.

"I personally think that the theory of evolution, especially its wide application, will be a big joke in the future history. Future generations of mankind will be very surprised that such a weak and vague hypothesis can be credulous and accepted to such an amazing extent. I think I told you that this generation is the most credulous in history. Believe that evolution is an example. " -broadcaster and writer Malcolm Magrick.