Well thank you, Doc. This is very interesting.
I believe in searching for truth and we should never allow personal biases and other issues to get in the way of where the search for truth leads.
That being said, I have studied every conceivable belief and idea in relation to the creation of the world and the creation of life, and I am convinced from my in-depth scientific studies that Darwinian evolution is patently nonsense and unscientific, and the real reason people adhere to it so strongly is not because of evidence but because "men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil."
I am not seeking to create an argument about religion but here is a very basic factual refutation of Darwinism:
1 Based on the laws of information science and mathematics, it is impossible for laws to come about without a Law Maker, it is impossible for designs to come about without a Designer, it is impossible for information to come about on its own without an Informational Intelligence behind it.
If anyone with even the smallest bit of sense were to find a computer integrated circuit chip or a Spyderco folding knife on the ground they would immediatelly recognize and understand that this is a manufactured product that was designed by intelligent designers and put together by intelligent pre-planning. The simplest living cell and organic tissues such as neurological tissues are hugely more intricate and complex than a folding knife or a computer chip or a car engine, and bare logic dictates that one must apply the same logical consistencies to the "natural world" and the things within it that one applies to the manufactured world of man-designed objects and artifacts.
2 Human beings do not have a good understanding of time as much as we could possibly have and how time is flexible and elastic to an extent, and that the firmament of space which is clearly not empty and devoid except in a visible sense to human eyes, can alter the rate of time flow.
3 DNA requires Proteins to construct it and proteins require DNA to guide their construction. Enzymes do not assemble out of nothing. The mathematical probabilities against even a single or a few protein molecules to self-assemble from random amino acid molecules on their own are so huge as to make it nonsensically impossible to even conceive of the idea that organic biological life came about on its own. Time and "chance" do not answer this problem. The critics and opposers to this will and have attempted to fabricate fictional UNOBSERVED scenarios like "Pre DNA, RNA based worlds" where RNA molecules catalyzed the first proteins. This has never been observed and is fantasy. And even then, the deeper levels of genetic information have to come from some source of intelligence.
Life does not come from non life. Life comes from pre existing life. This is a fundamental foundation of biology. God does not have that problem. He is the Source of Life and He is Eternally- Self Living and Self Existent, and so He as the Source Creator of life and the processes of life answers that issue.
4 Those whom claim life came from non life with no intelligence behind it are basically saying the value of life is nil because its all rocks basically. That is another topic altogether.
I do like the idea of making "pseudo life", life like machines for humans to program to carry out functions.
Imagine a "Man Made Knife Making Embryological Factory" that assembles basic molecules into brand new super strong stainless steel knives at low low costs.
PS: And from my studies and observations, selection and mutation are real processes. The thing with them is this: They do not have creative power to produce new genetic information in biological species. That's the thing. There IS change over time in living creatures but these changes are unable to produce new genetic information. Examples are often given of "evolution" in fruit flies, bacterial antiobiotic resistance, moths on trees, bacteria able to metabolize nylon, and other examples. These are not and never can be examples of the creation of new genetic information through mutation and natural selection.
Mutation and selection are conservative, down-grading processes that take away genetic information. They do not create new genetic information.
In order for upwards Darwinism as Darwin himself taught and believed to occur, one would have to add new genetic information which cannot be done without an intelligence behind it.
Any beneficial mutation that comes as a result of these processes is limited and in a wider area of surviving variables the creature has lost survivability.
Another example often given by proponents of Darwinism are what are called "Vestigial organs". Many years ago these were touted as proofs that humans and animals were evolving into more complex creatures from simpler creatures. But further examination showed that these organs do have uses.
Pelvic bones in cetaceans (whales) are anchor points for genital organs for mating.
The human appendix used to be called useless and vestigial but in truth it has uses, even the folks at National Geographic admit this:
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/new ... ans_2.html
Another problem is that proponents of Darwinism make false assumptions when making judgement-calls on what they call "bad designs".
Here is an example for you:
https://creation.com/recurrent-laryngeal-nerve-design