For darwinism to be true, as we all know (from the propaganda shoved down our throats), a primordial soup of chemicals for some unknown reason transformed into single cell living creatures, and those then into insects, then those into clams, fish, snails and such, then amazingly on into reptiles then mammals then humans, from goo to you as we like to say, certainly hard to believe! So they call that rational science?
With this flimsy hypothesis dreamed up by Charles Darwin now openly mocked by hundreds of millions of people, many scientists even admitting the whole thing seems far-fetched indeed, without any actual scientific basis, you wonder why the scientific community clings so doggedly to this thesis clearly destined for the dust bin of history, yet when the only alternative is creationism, the Bible’s account with syngameons (biblical kinds) of animals, you can understand why the bibliophobes cast as mythology the biblical account of history.
Darwin’s term species is meaningless genetically, for instance camels, llamas, and alpacas, differing species, are all interfertile, proving that they came from a common ancestor, such that only about 20,000 syngameons of animals need have been on Noah’s Ark, this fact little known by most darwinists, and perhaps never discussed by those who do know, at least among those who remain irrationally bibliophobic.
Also not discussed amongst the uniformitarian darwinists is that Noah’s Flood did not cover the mountain ranges, because they rose at the close of the flood while the new ocean basins sank to receive the floodwater which slid off when the mountain ranges rose and the continents were buoyed up by plastic flow of the molten mantle material below, solid science, see
, and to see how ancient history after the flood really unfolded, checkout