1.  How did snakes evolve?  Being a snake is actually a sort of a
complex deal.  You need a very long and narrow body, hearts, lungs and
all that sort of stuff have to be differently shaped and packed differently
than you find in normal animals, you need to know how to slither, which
is a fairly complex skill...  Attaining all of that would take many generations.

Consider however that the very first step along such a path (at least
according to the theory of evolution) would have to be being born as a
quadraplegic (without any arms or legs, due to mutation).

In the real world, there is nothing more pitiful than a creature with
no arms and legs.  Humans in such condition are generally kept alive by
charity;  animals in such a state last an hour or two before being eaten by
predators.  How then did the snake survive the the many generations it
would take to evolve the complex features he requires after being mutated into
quadraplegic sitting duck target for every predator on Earth?


2.  Insect evolution.  Insects are presumed to have evolved from (segmented) worms.
Nonetheless there is no evidence of this having actually happened and the simplest
insects are vastly more complex than the most complex worm.  The pictures we see of
the worm to insect transition show vast gains in complexity at every step with no
explainations as to what caused that complexity.  How and why did insects arise from
worms?


3.  Lungs.  In theory, lungfish are supposed to have given rise to amphibians and
amphibians to our modern land animals.  Nonetheless, lungfish don't get around all
that well on dry land.  They use their capabilities to move from one stream to
another or to bury themselves in mud and hang on until the rains come.  Consider that
the transition from lungfish to amphibian is supposed to have occurred during an age
of insects with 2' wingspans and consider what a swarm of such insects would do to
a lungfish which was trying to actually spend enough time out on dry land to
become a functional land animal...  How did the lungfish overcome all of that?

For that matter, if fins could turn into legs and feet, we should see it happening
from time to time in the world's waters.  It isn't like humans don't haul in millions
of fish every year and look at them.  Where are the fish with feet?

4.  Metamorphoses.  Metamorphoses does not exist amongst fish and yet amphibians
display it.  Where does metamorphoses come from and how did it "evolve"?  Wouldn't a
lungfish trying to evolve into a frog have enough problems without worrying about
metamorphoses?

5.  Insect metamorphoses.  Evolutionists claim that we all start from a single cell
and evolve through various forms prior to being born;  that butterflies and other such
insects merely spend a certain amount of time living out in the world in one of the
foetal states or some such.  Nonetheless butterflies and moths use cocoons and it's
very hard to imagine how the caterpillar would survive his changeover without the
cocoon to protect him.  That says that the first such creature which ever started
using such a system had exactly one generation to figure out the whole thing with
cocoons or it wouldn't have made it.  How did that work?

6.  Paranormal capabilities.  Evolutionists generally pooh-pooh this kind of
evidence and attempt to discredit the people involved with such studies,
since they instinctively dislike the idea of having to deal with anything
like that within an evolutinoary context.

Nonetheless, there are other people and groups of people who do not have
the luxury of trying to ignore things which do not fit within their
ideological paradigms.  The king of France in the 1400's, for instance, did
not have such a luxury.  The Catholic church, apparently making up in
thoroughness for anything they might lack in celibacy, took several hundred
years to analyze the case of Joan of Arc, and ultimately determined that at
least some of her activities required information that she had no way of
having other than for paranormal means;  they cannonized Joan in the 20'th
century.

Likewise the US military does not have the luxury of ignoring such things.
You can check out:

        http://www.kingdomlife.com/kingdom/remote_viewing.htm

or do your own google search on 'Stubblebine' and 'remote viewing' at your
leisure.  Books have been published on soviet activities in this area and I
presume American general officers are not paid to investigate pseudoscience.

Rupert Sheldrake's www site is http://www.sheldrake.org

Sheldrake is a former director of studies in cellular biology at Cambridge
University who has made a second career of using statistical methodology
and intelligent experiment design to investigate things normally termed
"paranormal" and is generally viewed as public enemy #1 by the CSICOP crowd
and other such "science vigilantes".  If nothing else, his methods are
unassailable and his credentials are significantly better than theirs are.
Sheldrake has pretty much provided valid statistical evidence that certain
things which are usually termed paranormal are real.

How do paranormal capabilities evolve?