Arguments against Creationism

This set of pages attempts to collect all the creationist claims you are likely to run across, provide brief rebuttals, and, in many cases, point to where you can find further information.

This article gives brief descriptions of the different varieties of creationism, both Bible-based and otherwise, with examples of notable proponents.

Creationists enjoy pointing out evolutionary embarrassments like Piltdown man and Nebraska man. But how do they deal with their own errors?

Scientific creationism differs from conventional science in numerous and substantial ways. One obvious difference is the way scientists and creationists deal with error.

A list of prominent (or once-prominent) creationists whose graduate degrees are either honorary or of suspicious origin.

A number of creationists have claimed that Donald Johanson, discoverer of the famous Australopithecus afarensis specimen dubbed "Lucy," found her knee joint several kilometers away from the rest of her skeleton. This claim is absolutely false, but that doesn't stop some creationists from making it.

Many different people oppose some or all aspects of Darwin's thinking, or the views that have arisen since and go by the term 'Darwinism.' This essay distinguishes and names the major varieties of anti-Darwinism.

Project Steve is a spoof of the lists of people that evolution deniers use to try to argue that evolution is a "theory in crisis" conducted by the National Center for Science Science Education. It uses humor to eviscerate claims that scientists are abandoning evolutionary biology. In addition to explaining the project, this page also provides many links that document the broad and deep acceptance of common descent by the scientific community.

Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, is frequently quoted by creationists as having said that there are no transitional fossils. But did he really say that? And if so, what did he mean?

The creation 'science' field known as OOPARTS, or "Out Of Place ARTifactS" is a lively area of study with numerous examples. This paper will examine the most popular and least understood specimen, the Coso Artifact.

The creationist quote-miners have been at it again, this time on the subject of supernova remnants and their supposed support for a young universe. In this latest example of creationist dishonesty, we have scientists quoted out of context, quotes and motives fabricated, and the names and affiliations of scientists incorrectly identified.

A list of questions that those slippery creationists never seem to want to answer. (That doesn't stop the evolutionists from asking them, though.)

An enumeration of questions that creationists seem to have no answers for. Most of them deal with the scientific theory and evidence for creation, things which talk.origins readers know are elusive.

New evidence from molecular genetics joins with the immense body of clues from other disciplines, collectively providing overwhelming evidence for evolution and against special creation.

Cosmology is now being exploited by creationists who argue that the fundamental constants of nature are so precisely tuned that an intelligent designer was required to create the universe.

Recently a great deal of press attention has been given to biochemist Michael Behe's claims that many biological systems are "irreducibly complex" at the molecular level. According to Behe, this means they are not likely to have evolved in a step-by-step fashion via natural selection. How right is he?

Creationists often argue that the origin of life (abiogenesis) is impossible using claims such as the formation of any enzyme by chance is nearly impossible, Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation, and Borel's law disproves abiogenesis. This group of articles explores what is wrong with these creationist arguments.

A number of creationists have stated that evolutionary theory leads logically to racism. This brief article discusses aspects of leading ICR creationist Henry Morris's own beliefs that appear to be racist. Also included is a summary analysis of the racism-creationism connection by Tom McIver.

The Creation Research Society requires its members to adhere to a statement of belief. One wonders why. Could it be that the evidence points in another direction?

Many creationists view the duckbilled platypus as an enigma that evolution cannot explain. However, fossil and anatomical evidence are completely consistent with the idea that the platypus evolved from primitive mammals that retained many of their reptilian characteristics.

Creationists often cite the bombardier beetle as an example of a creature that could not have evolved in a step-wise evolutionary manner. This essay disputes that claim, in part by presenting a plausible scenario for its gradual evolution.

Creationists have often asked us to wonder how a woodpecker's tongue (and hence the woodpecker itself) could have evolved. Many have claimed, erroneously, that a woodpecker's tongue is anchored in the right nostril and not in the back of the beak as in other birds. Thus the transition from non-woodpecker to woodpecker was impossible, or so the logic goes. This article shows, not only that the creationists have gotten their anatomy wrong, but also that a gradual continuum exists between woodpecker and non-woodpecker structures even today.

A plausible gradualistic origin path for feathers is proposed. The author notes that feathers have separate structures which must work together but that this is not necessarily evidence that feathers were designed (a common creationist canard).

If all organisms were created individually, why do so many of them show examples of poor design? Examples include the Panda's thumb, the human urethra, "homosexual stabbing rape" in bedbugs, and detorted motion in gastropods.

An in-depth report and analysis of behind-the-scenes goings-on in the 1993 airing of Sun International Pictures' The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark on CBS. Sun's shoddy research techniques are exposed.

On Sunday February 25th, 1996, NBC broadcast "The Mysterious Origins of Man," narrated by Charlton Heston, purporting to be a documentary about scientific evidence that would overturn currently accepted theories of human history. In fact, it was little more than a pseudo-scientific propaganda piece with large contributions by people affiliated with the Krishna Consciousness movement.

Clarence Darrow, the defending attorney in the Scopes trial, is often claimed to have said, "It is bigotry for public schools to teach only one theory of origins." Did he really say that?

The 1990-91 list of faculty members and administrators at the San Diego-based Institute for Creation Research. Also presented is Steve Linke's research into what the ICR science faculty have published between 1988 and 1992.

Lies, misquotes, and other instances of dishonesty by members of the ICR and other creationists. Some topics include geological overthrusts, the Gish-Saladin debate, Gish's infamous "bullfrog proteins," and a misquote of Darwin.

A draft discussion of the ICR's Grand Canyon Dating Project, as proposed and executed by the ICR's Steve Austin. Austin has obtained some bad Rb-Sr isochron dates, though there are several serious questions regarding his methodology.

The Institute for Creation Research, the premiere outlet for young-earth creationist writings, has its own museum, which is open to the public. Steve Linke and Karen Bartelt provide separate accounts of their visits to the museum.

Hitching, author of The Neck of the Giraffe has been quoted many times by creationists in support of their views. Hitching's background is generally not known, and in fact he was a TV script writer, paranormalist, dowser, and amateur psychic. His book borrows heavily from creationist writings and borders on plagiarism.

The authors discuss creationist Dmitri Kouznetsov's lack of understanding of even the most basic biological concepts, as well as his use of highly questionable citations.

Denton's anti-evolution book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis is based on a poor understanding of the evidence as this review shows.

Phillip Johnson, the author of Darwin on Trial, is taken to task for his self-contradicting statements and his rather myopic view of science.

Icons of Evolution by Jonathan Wells purports to document that "students and the public are being systematically misinformed about the evidence for evolution." But it is Icons itself that is really misinforming the public.

Jonathan Sarfati of Answers in Genesis charges that limb development shows that birds are not descended from dinosaurs since the digit order is wrong. And furthermore that frogs could not share a common ancestor with mammals since, he claims, that the hands of mammals and amphibians "develop in a completely different manner." A professional developmental biologist shows why Sarfati is wrong.

This review argues that Dembski's case is nothing more than a god-of-the-gaps argument dressed up in misleading pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo.

Both young-earth and intelligent-design creationists often claim that evolution is impossible because of various claims about information such as mutation and natural selection "cannot create information." This article provides a brief background on Information Theory and explains how Creationists such as Werner Gitt and Lee Spetner misuse one of the greatest contributions of the 20th Century.

A common claim by those who deny evolution is that there is no way to evolve an increase in information. The Apo-AIM mutation is a counter example which shows a beneficial mutation with a new function. Answers in Genesis has disputed that this mutation is an increase in information claiming that specificity has been lost. This document shows why Answers in Genesis is wrong.

An examination of the metaphors used by 'Intelligent Design' proponents such as William Dembski and Michael Behe.

The Jehovah's Witness Life book dismisses the evidence for human evolution with a few sweeping generalities. Like many other creationists, the Jehovah's Witnesses rely on gross misrepresentation of the evidence and the selective misuse of quotations and references.

The Jehovah's Witnesses believe in a form of old-earth creationism, which is expounded in their definitive anti-evolution book, Life: How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or Creation?. A former Jehovah's Witness reviews the book and provides a brief synopsis of the chapters dealing with evolution.

Many evolution deniers argue against evolution by providing many quotations. This FAQ gives many reason why this tactic is invalid and documents examples of out-of-context quotations by creationists.

The collecting of quotes to attack evolution is often called "quote mining" and is a very common tactic used by those who wish to deny evolution or modern evolutionary biology. A creationist on the talk.origins newsgroup posted a large collection of such quotes which he copied from a creationist website. This resulted in other participants looking up those quotes. The results, gathered in the Quote Mine Project, show that many of the quotes are blatantly out-of-context.

A quote by the Nobel Prize winning biologist Hermann Muller on mutations, which has often been used by evolution deniers, turns out to be inaccurate, misleading, and out-of-date.

Creationists often throw around terms like disorder, entropy, and the second law of thermodynamics to try to disprove evolution. This set of FAQs examines what is wrong with their arguments.

A response to an attack on this Archive by The True.Origin Archive.

Creationist Kent Hovind has offered $250,000 for empirical proof of evolution, and claims that scientists' failure to collect shows that evolution is a religious belief without supporting evidence. This article demonstrates why it is Hovind's challenge that is inherently dishonest and formulated so as to be impossible to meet.

The claim that Charles Darwin recanted his acceptance of evolution on his deathbed is refuted.

The lengths to which one might go in a literal interpretation of the Bible are illustrated lucidly by the Flat Earth Society (although it is important to point out that most creationists do not believe in a flat earth). The article includes a verbatim reproduction of a membership flyer put out by the Flat Earth Society. Must be read to be believed.