I think that there is more evidence refuting evolution than supporting it. It seems like all the evidence supporting evolution is questionable. There are many missing links, such as the confusion of the Archaeopteryx and the fraudulent embryo drawings. Also, the chance of DNA changing enough to form a significantly more complex organism is very slim and the evolution of an amoeba is questionable. Finally, there has been proof of irreducibly complex organ which, according to Darwin, disproves his theories of evolution.

To begin, support for evolution is very sketchy, and has many missing links. The evidence for evolution has not been one-hundred percent accurate, and therefore leaves some room for questioning. For example, the Archaeopteryx was originally believed to be an intermediate animal bridging the gap between reptiles and birds. However, with closer study of the fossil records, scientists proved that the Archaeopteryx is not a reptile...