Give your one best shot - against evolution

State of the art: molecular biology shattered the evolution theory.Why don't you have a look at the 4 shattering arguments against evolution I posted today. (topic: the scientific end of evolution). The past 20 years have demonstrated the evolution theory to be wrong. Since science behaves like slow matter it will take a couple of decades before everyone is aware of it. (At least, if evolutionists are willing to admit it).The final devastating blow, that actually shattered the remaining pillar of theory of evolution (natural selection) was the recent discovery that the major part of genetic information seems to be redundant. Most genes can be knocked out without killing the organism, and a lot of genes have been demonstrated not to affect the fitness of the organism at all. These data demonstrate the irrelevance of natural selection in the maintenance of these genes (There has to be only one such gene and the concept of Natural selection has been falsified).The first pillar of the theory (i.e. random mutations as driving force of evolution) is in conflict with another discipline of established science: information theory.You are free to believe whatever you like but don't tell me that evolution is supported by science, because it is just the opposite.
The only reason to stick to the old --falsified-- theory is because there is nothing (scientific) to replace it.So, in contrast to what most evolutionists still believe (recall: slow matter), there is currently no evolution theory that is backed up by hard science. If you have any question about the demise of the NDT, do not hesitate to ask. I will provide you with scientific evidence that falsifies the hypothesis of evolution (on whatever level you like).Best wishes,
Peter

Apparently you are not up-to-date with molecular biology. I recommend you to do a literature search on this topic. Read them carefully, than we may discuss this topic. In the meantime I will finish off with NDT.
Peter

Dear maiden,
Fortunately, I recogonised your fallacy. In logic this type of reasoning is called an "extension", and belongs to the type of "faulty analogies". A faulty analogy is an inappropriate comparison or an attempt to compare two or more dissimilar things. Recently a scientist uttered a similar faulty analogy: "You can't accept one part of science because it brings you good things like electricity and penicillin, and throw away another part because it brings you some things you don't like about the origin of life". It is a very subtle type of fallacies and eludes most people.
Have a nice day,
Peter