Evolution is a fallacy

Note the argument from Pro is simply verbatim C&P of the article "The Fallacies of Evolution" [1], the debating limit was intentionally set to 4000 characters to avoid this exact type of argument, known commonly as the "Gish Gallop"[2] As Con, the parts relevant to the definition of evolution as noted in the above will be addressed. "Evolution does not fit the strict definition of science. It can not be repeated or measured." Evolution as defined in the above has been observed with many well known and ongoing experiments [3]. "Macroevolution states that living things over a long period of time produce new kinds of organisms." More precisely, one of the consequences of the theory of evolution and the age of the earth is the idea of uniform common descent - all species originated from a common ancestor. This has been tested and confirmed experimentally[4]. "The Big Bang is the cause of order?" The Big Bang is a theory in cosmology, even if it were falsified, it would not falsify evolution. Much of the C&P argument presented is similar in nature and does not address the resolution directly. "For an ape to become a man theoretically he must mutate only 1 % of DNA. [...] It is estimated that for 1% difference only one million mutations are needed. How can one have a million mutations with each mutation in the direct order to make a human. Impossible !!!!" This is known as the and-multiplication error, it assumes that all mutations had to happen in a particular order, uninterrupted, this is not how evolution takes place[5]. It is not flipping a coin one million times and waiting for a large run of all heads, it is more like flipping a coin a million times, throwing out all tails and ending up with a about a half a million heads. Evolution simply keeps all the heads, and if you flip for long enough you will get as many heads as you wish. "Does similarity mean we come from the same ancestry or does it mean we were created by one Creator who set out an ultimate design for the universe." Homology is not used to argue for evolution simply because things are the same, it is that they are the same -and- they form a phylogenetic tree, i.e. the pattern of similarity has an ordered sequence which matches descent with modification. In very simple form - a point can be taken, one organism, from that organism one can trace forward or backwards and watch the similarities converge and diverge as evolution predicts [6]. "This theory is called Punctuated Equilibrium and is advocated by Niles Eldrige and Stephen J. Gould." Punctuated Equilibrium does not argue evolution does not take place but rather that the rate of descent is variable. Gould clearly supported evolution and repeatedly, and to no avail, tried to clarify creationists who used his own work to argue against evolution claiming that he denied it[7]. Directly from Gould : --- Our confidence that evolution occurred centers upon three general arguments. First, we have abundant, direct, observational evidence of evolution in action, from both the field and laboratory. ... The second argument—that the imperfection of nature reveals evolution ... The third argument is more direct: transitions are often found in the fossil record. --- [1] http://www.creationstudies.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://www.newscientist.com... [4] Theobald, Douglas L. (13 May 2010). "A formal test of the theory of universal common ancestry.". Nature 465 (7295): 219–222. [5] http://www-lmmb.ncifcrf.gov... [6] Evolution vs. Intelligent Design: Does Homology = Relatedness? [http://www.youtube.com...] [7] Evolution as Fact and Theory [http://www.stephenjaygould.org...]