This article is over ten years old, but it is still apropos. Creationists are still using the same empty arguments, and this article still neuters them. I know I have repeatedly had to endure these quibbles, put forward with such fervent confidence every time, and it would be nice to simply be able to refer them to these answers.
Here are a few examples of their challenges:
Evolution is only a theory.
If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?
Evolutionists cannot point to any transitional fossils.
Follow the link below to see them deflated.
On that note, why do creationists always ask questions like these? They’re trying to replace a well-tested theory with something that they think is better. Why aren’t they defending their candidate with science instead of always muddying the water with these specious arguments?
Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don’t hold up