Evolution - Unable to make real predictions
MSNBC has an article about where the evolution of the human race is heading. High-priest of evolution Richard Dawkins things that any good evolutionist will avoid the question...and why?

The problem is, scientists can't predict with precision how our species will adapt to changes over the next millennium, let alone the next million years. That's why Dawkins believes it's imprudent to make a prediction in the first place.

I.e. We have no clue and our vaunted theory of evolution doesn't really provide any tight predictions, only vague concepts with enough wiggle room to allow any occurance to be within what we find.

And, as reader ReSoT4eM reminds in this post on the lack of uses of Common Descent Evolution in practice, it even has trouble with guessing what current observations actually mean. Case in point, thanks to evolution, many doctors used to think that the human body had 100 or so vetigial (without function and left over from a previous ancestor species) organs. This lead to a wide variety of unnecessary operations and bad diagnosis.

So if evolution can be trusted to predict the future or describe the present, why do we trust it to illuminate the past?
- posted by Alan Grey @ Monday, May 16, 2005