The world of science is full of deep debates, and the theory of evolution is no exception.

Challenging Evolution: A Critical Examination of Its Scientific Founda

The world of science is full of deep debates, and the theory of evolution is no exception. Critics claim that its foundations are not supported by reliable empirical data, and assertions about transitional forms and the emergence of new species remain in doubt. Proponents of alternative views argue that evolution is based on the dogmas of materialism, and its arguments are not underpinned by clearly traceable mechanisms in nature.

At the center of the criticism is the principle of Darwinism, which places simple adaptation to the environment at the forefront. Nevertheless, observations of life show that the tiniest organisms, such as fungi and insects, demonstrate a high capacity for adaptation, raising the question of why a complex organism like a human would emerge with relatively modest reproductive capabilities.

Additionally, fundamental laws of physics—especially the second law of thermodynamics—give rise to questions: how can processes that inherently lead to increased disorder result in the growing complexity of biological systems?

In conclusion, critics emphasize that observations of modern biological processes have not documented a clear example of the emergence of a new species with genuine genetic innovation. This argument, along with the internal contradictions of the theory itself, calls into question its completeness and reliability. Although questions remain open, such a lively debate only underscores science’s commitment to the search for truth, forcing us to constantly reassess established dogmas.

Which arguments are presented to assert that evolution does not exist, and what is the main criticism of this theory?

The main arguments against the existence of evolution and the criticism of the theory can be summarized as follows:

1. Absence of reliable scientific evidence. According to the authors, “to date, there is not a single scientific proof of the postulates of the theory of evolution. The study of life’s evolution on Earth is based on primitive, ancient dogmas of materialistic philosophy adapted to the laws of nature” (source: link txt). It is additionally noted that “there are no mechanisms demonstrating real evolution in action, and no transitional fossils indicating that it ever took place” (source: link txt).

2. Internal contradictions within the theory itself. Some authors point out that the claim that the principle of Darwinism (adaptability and reproduction) is the driving force of evolution does not withstand scrutiny. For example, it is noted that “the greatest ability to reproduce and survive in harsh conditions is shown not by higher organisms but by fungi and spores. After fires, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions that decimate living beings, lower species of insects, fungi, and spores avoid extinction” (source: link txt). This raises the question of why, if more “primitive” organisms are exceptionally well-adapted to survival, a human—with much lower reproductive capacity compared to insects or fish—should have emerged.

3. Violation of the laws of thermodynamics. Criticism of the evolutionary theory is also based on fundamental physical principles. It is stated, “If evolution really took place, there should exist some possible biological means by which it could occur. Among the most basic provisions are the laws of thermodynamics… Processes left to chance—the method by which evolution is said to occur—cannot become more directed, but rather increasingly disordered” (source: link txt). Another formulation asserts, “Evolution is fundamentally impossible because it contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. The scientific fact is that we observe the self-degradation of complex systems, not their self-complication” (source: link txt).

4. Lack of evidence for the emergence of new species. An argument is put forward that modern observations have not recorded the appearance of new species with novel genetic information, while there is documented ongoing species loss: “The authors claim that evolution is taking place at the present time. But where is the evidence? There is no record in human history of the emergence of any new species” (source: link txt). This indicates a lack of positive examples of evolutionary processes.

5. Doubts about the soundness of the theory itself. Some critics emphasize that even the data used by evolutionary proponents often consist of isolated statements from defenders of individual components of the theory, which in their view do not substantiate the entire concept: “The statements of the very defenders of the theory of evolution are cited. These statements refute one or another evolutionary concept, not the entire theory of evolution… Thus, biology finds itself in the strange position of being a science based on an unproven theory” (source: link txt).

In summary, the main criticism of the evolutionary theory in this context is that, according to its critics, it relies on dogmas and assumptions that are not supported by empirical data, contradicts fundamental laws of thermodynamics, and does not demonstrate clear mechanisms for the emergence of new species. These arguments cast doubt on the theory’s ability to explain phenomena observed in the biological world.

Supporting citation(s):
“To date, there is not a single scientific proof of the postulates of the theory of evolution. The study of life’s evolution on Earth is based on primitive, ancient dogmas of materialistic philosophy adapted to the laws of nature. Materialism is taken by evolutionists as a priori, and they try to force science to conform to this principle, as evolutionist Leventin candidly stated.” (source: link txt)
“The principle of Darwinism—adaptability and reproduction as the basis of evolution—does not withstand any criticism… Why did a human, who only has a few children in his lifetime, emerge when an insect lays thousands of eggs and a fish spawns even more?” (source: link txt)
“Among the most basic and widely applied provisions are the laws of thermodynamics, the first of which deals with energy transformation. The second, which has been proven only on paper, is the law of entropy. The method of evolution. If evolution really took place, there should be some possible biological means by which it could have occurred… Processes left to chance—the method by which it is claimed that evolution occurs—cannot become more directed, but instead only more disordered.” (source: link txt)
“Evolution is fundamentally impossible because it contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. The scientific fact is that we observe the self-degradation of complex systems, not their self-complication.” (source: link txt)
“The authors claim that evolution is taking place at the present time. But where is the evidence? There is no record in human history of the emergence of any new species with novel genetic information.” (source: link txt)