Journal:  William Durham, Human Ecology
PHD U Michigan; Stanford Chair of Dept. of Anthropological Sciences, and Bing Professor in Human Biology
Because genes and culture ultimately interact in the minds of individuals, the models are focused on individual-level processes of  "constrained microevolution. " – what is constrained microevolution? If he calls it an individual level process, what isn’t he calling it? Theory, idea, fact, law, story, myth; what does calling it a “process” suggest?
The central hypotheses are (1) that cultural evolution as well as genetic evolution commonly proceeds by the differential transmission of alternative "instructions"  among individuals, (2) that genetic and cultural processes directly interact through mutual influence on each other's differentials of transmission in a population, (3) that the cultural process is often self-selecting by its own criteria, and (4) that these criteria generally operate to enhance rather than oppose human adaptation. He opens his own theories for debate; does he do that for evolution in general?
Since Darwin's Origin of Species, evolutionary theorists have recognized that "Natural Selection has been the most important, but not the exclusive means" of microevolution ( Darwin, 1859, in Appleman, 1979: 38). What does “recognize” mean in terms of an argument? What did the original quote really say? But he is giving the tools to find out.
Andrew Yang; International Studies in the philosophy of Science

In 1974 philosophy of science put evolutionary biology on official notice. In that year
Karl Popper had ‘come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific
theory but a metaphysical research programme’ (Popper 1974, 134). This claim was
taken by many as a serious and substantive challenge to the status of evolutionary biology
as a scientific discipline. Although Popper’s conception of a metaphysical research
program was quite sophisticated and not necessarily pejorative, his principle of demarcation
set out clear criteria for what could be considered genuine science versus merely
pseudoscience. By Popper’s initial estimation evolutionary biology did not make the
grade on two counts: Darwinian theory was historical in nature and therefore lacking
the universal and law-like qualities that his formulation of science demanded, and likewise
natural selection did not appear to be testable in the ways genuine science necessitated.
Popper’s assertion provided a definitive form to concerns that had circulated
about biology and its ‘provincial’ nature as compared with the universally structured
laws of the physical sciences (Munson 1975).
While it may be tempting to conclude that all is well that ends well for the cause of
public science education, the Arkansas case raised a variety of troubling questions.
Even though the judge was finally convinced of the scientific qualities of evolutionary
biology compared to ‘creation-science’, it is significant that the final decision pivoted
on philosophical argumentation of what counted as a science in principle, and not on
the merits or demerits of the evidentiary accounts that evolution or creationism
provided. – the quotes imply that creation-science isn’t.
Laudan should be pleased, as this addressed his core critique of the earlier Arkansas trials: ‘The correct way to combat Creationism is to confute the empirical claims it does make, not to pretend that it makes no such
claims at all’ (Laudan 1982, 17), ‘[…] we should confront their claims directly and in
piecemeal fashion by asking what evidence and arguments can be marshalled for and
against each of them’ (Laudan 1982, 19).

Matthew McGee:  Mission of Mercy; Discover the Destiny Ministries, Denver, Co.
“Creation Evidence and Evolution Myth” : title of article: what is myth? Non-empirical explanation of phenomena
First Law of Thermodynamics: This is the law of conservation of matter and energy. Matter and energy can change from one to the other. But matter-energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
Matter cannot be created within the framework of the natural laws of science. Matter therefore, could only have come into existence by super-natural means (the Creator).
The general theory of evolution, the big bang, and other such theories only try to explain how life was formed out of unorganized non-living matter and energy.
They provide no clues at all as to how all of the matter and energy came into existence in the first place.
Second Law of Thermodynamics: This law is sometimes called the principal of entropy increase. That means that the universe is constantly becoming more and more disordered.
By this law, incredibly complex life forms could never be formed from simple raw materials, even if you waited a trillion years. Some will argue that this law applies only to closed systems, and that since the earth gets energy from the sun, the earth is an open system which can become more organized. Certainly additional energy is required in order for anything to become more organized, but energy by itself is not sufficient. An increase in information is required. For example, a nuclear bomb dropped on a city adds tremendous energy to the city. Does this make the city more organized? No, it turns the city into in a mass of smoldering rubble. If a tornado hits a house, it is not going to caulk the bathtub, do the dishes, and lock up when it leaves. Likewise, the sun provides no information to the earth, and is incapable of causing an increase in organization.
Evidence of the Global Flood
The eruption of the Mount St. Helens volcano in the early 1980's and the tremendous mud-flows that came afterward provided an excellent look at the kind of effects that the global flood had on the earth's surface. The mud-flows carved out a large gorge that is like small scaled model of the Grand Canyon. Naturally, water run-off from the hills began to flow through the gorge in the form of a small stream. Many geologists, if they had been unaware of the Mount St. Helens eruption, would have said that the stream carved out that gorge over hundreds of millions of years. But the gorge did not even exist prior to 1980. The stream did not cause the gorge, but rather, the gorge caused the stream. The many rock layers and other geological formations that we see all over the world can be explained by the global, catastrophic flood. – which geologists, when, where?
After such a catastrophic flood, we would expect to find vast numbers of dead animals and plants, all over the world, buried in rock formed by flowing water. That is exactly what we find. Many dinosaur graveyards have been found containing the skeletons of thousands of dinosaurs together, with their bones aligned in a uniform direction, indicating they were all killed together in one massive water flow.
All of the Egyptian pyramids have the horizontal streaks caused by thousands of years of erosion by wind-blown desert sand. But the older Sphinx which sits in their midst shows an altogether different type of erosion. Though the upper portion of the Sphinx has been recarved be various pharaohs, the lower portion still shows the deep rounded scars of erosion by water. Upon this realization, some scientists began to theorize that in the period 4500 years ago and beyond, Egypt used to receive much more rainfall than it has in the last 4500 years. But those of us who know the Bible know what really happened about 4500 years ago.