Evolution did happen

Suppose I declare that I can prove Santa Claus exists. You ask for proof. On Christmas morning, I take you around town toshow you all of the presents under trees. You object, explaining that presents under the tree fail to prove that Santa Claus put them there. You ask again for proof and again I show more presents under more trees. You want to watch Santa Claus fly in his sleigh, land on the roof, slide down the chimney, and put presents under the tree. “Oh,” I say, “I can’t show you that, so let me show you more presents under trees.” You rightly claim that I’ve failed to prove that Santa Claus exists. I claimed to know the cause of the presents (Santa Claus), but all I ever show is the effects (presents under the tree). You and I both know that there are many possible causes of presents under trees, and to prove my claim I have to show Santa Claus climbing down chimneys. Our debate has been like this example. You set out to prove that evolution produces new species. I ask for proof and you show me species of animals. You explain that a white moth turns dark. I argue that you’ve shown me an effect: a species of moth turns color, but you haven’t shown me the cause. (Indeed, the moth example is poor because there is no new species.) I ask for examples where we’ve seen a new species come into existence. You say you can’t produce that evidence. But thereis no example even in artificial selection, where humans have produced many variations of plants and animals, where a new species came into existence. For thousands of years people used artificial selection and not a single new species comes from that practice. Add thousands of hours of people working in labs trying to make a new species. Still there is no new species. You point to fossils and DNA as evidence that evolution occurred. The problem is that the argument is always “notice how similar these fossils are to those fossils; therefore, the older animal gave way to the newer species.” The same argument works with DNA. “My goodness, ape DNA is very similar to human DNA; therefore they must be closely related, they must be a new species that arose from a common ancestor.” But the fact that two things look alike proves no causal connection with a third thing. In other words, when you say, “They look alike; therefore they must be connected in some way,” you utter a fallacy where you completely invent something that isn’t proved. “My red barn looks like his red car, so they must be related in some way other than being red.” “My DNA looks like a chimp’s DNA, so we must have come from the same source.” The conclusion is completely invented with no proof of a connection. The second problem with fossil and DNA “evidence” is that, once again, they are presents under the Christmastree. When you say, “This species came from that species,” you already assume or presuppose that one species can comefrom another. Two fallacies occur here. The first is “begging the question” or “circular reasoning.” You assume the thing you’re trying to prove: “Evolution caused this species to become that species; therefore evolution occurs.” The second fallacy is “post hoc ergo propter hoc.” The fact that something occurred before something else doesn’t prove that the first thing caused the second thing. Incidentally, my critique of your claims that lactose intolerance and the hemoglobin gene result from natural selection is quite telling. Your ignoring my critique of your examples of moths and lizards is surprising. Surely if you could rescue these examples, you would have tried to do so. I’m glad that you think the debate was good. I don’t think we ever got off the starting block. I hoped to take this debate into more specific critiques of natural selection. Since you enjoy reading about evolution, and if you don’t object to critiques or your views, I recommend the following: The Edge of Evolution, by Michael Behe. Behe is a biology professor. What Darwin Got Wrong, by Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piattelli-Parmarini. By the way, these two authors are completeatheists, if that helps you decide to read this book or not.