DNA, IC, natural selection and debating a Creationist

[Minimalist]

Certainly creationist dickheads think their "theory" is the equivalent of the theory of evolution.


One of many things about which they are wrong.

[MarcusF]

Well this was her 'reply' last night...

I believe nothing climbs up a phylogenetic tree. Darwin believed that with no evidence, thus his "Tree of Life." There is no evidence, however, that fish have turned into amphibians, then reptiles, etc.

So called "transitional" fossils are held up based on logical fallacies galore & speculation presented as if it is evidence, however. The only way something could climb up the "Tree" would be through newly created DNA. Even F. Crick, its codiscoverer, said evolution can't make DNA.

I'm fine with the transitional fossils part, that's easy enough. But I'm still not sure how to counter the crap about evolution can't make DNA. I know debating these idiots is pointless but please, humour me . Is it possible to 'add' DNA in any biological situation? Something in my head is telling me its not but I don't know why. And why would evolution need to add DNA in order to work? I thought it required existing DNA to be changed via mutation or other means?


And thanks for that very awesome offer Minimalist, pm sent