"Fletis Humplebacker" wrote in message
...
Evolution by itself leaves more questions than it answers. Perhaps
intellectual curiousity will finally be purged out of public ed but I
hope not.


I will be most interested to see your lists of answered and open
questions, to see which is greater.


# ORIGIN OF LIFE. Why do textbooks claim that the 1953 Miller-Urey
experiment shows how life's building blocks may have formed on the
early Earth -- when conditions on the early Earth were probably nothing
like those used in the experiment, and the origin of life remains a
mystery?

# DARWIN'S TREE OF LIFE. Why don't textbooks discuss the "Cambrian
explosion," in which all major animal groups appear together in the fossil
record fully formed instead of branching from a common ancestor -- thus
contradicting the evolutionary tree of life?

# HOMOLOGY. Why do textbooks define homology as similarity due to
common ancestry, then claim that it is evidence for common ancestry --
a circular argument masquerading as scientific evidence?

# VERTEBRATE EMBRYOS. Why do textbooks use drawings of similarities
in vertebrate embryos as evidence for their common ancestry -- even though
biologists have known for over a century that vertebrate embryos are not
most
similar in their early stages, and the drawings are faked?

# ARCHAEOPTERYX. Why do textbooks portray this fossil as the missing link
between dinosaurs and modern birds -- even though modern birds are
probably
not descended from it, and its supposed ancestors do not appear until
millions
of years after it?

# PEPPERED MOTHS. Why do textbooks use pictures of peppered moths
camouflaged on tree trunks as evidence for natural selection -- when
biologists
have known since the 1980s that the moths don't normally rest on tree
trunks,
and all the pictures have been staged?

# DARWIN'S FINCHES. Why do textbooks claim that beak changes in Galapagos
finches during a severe drought can explain the origin of species by
natural selection
-- even though the changes were reversed after the drought ended, and no
net evolution
occurred?

# MUTANT FRUIT FLIES. Why do textbooks use fruit flies with an extra pair
of wings
as evidence that DNA mutations can supply raw materials for evolution --
even though
the extra wings have no muscles and these disabled mutants cannot survive
outside
the laboratory?

# HUMAN ORIGINS. Why are artists' drawings of ape-like humans used to
justify
materialistic claims that we are just animals and our existence is a mere
accident --
when fossil experts cannot even agree on who our supposed ancestors were
or what
they looked like?

# EVOLUTION A FACT? Why are we told that Darwin's theory of evolution is a
scientific
fact -- even though many of its claims are based on misrepresentations of
the facts?

This appears to be one list with 10 questions. Can't make any comparisons
yet. IMHO evolution has provided explanations for a few more than 10
questions.