Here is a very short video discussing six problems with evolutionary theory. It covers:
(1) “vestigial” organs. First, evolution needs to prove that functional organs can be produced by random genetic copying errors, which it cannot. Second, there are no “vestigial organs”; since the late 19th Century, when these organs were deemed to be “vestigial,” scientists have discovered the function of every such organ.
(2) the assertion that morphological similarity indicates common origin. Darwinists call this “homology,” but the fact that many different organisms have similar form and features logically supports the hypothesis of a common designer at least as well as it supports the hypothesis of descent from a common ancestor.
(3) the idea that the fossil record supports evolution. By the way, the quote from Mark Ridley (“no evolutionist . . . uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution, as opposed to special creation”) is accurate. I quote that in my book, too, and, at the USC science library, I tracked it to the journal it was published in.
(4) the assertion that genetic mutations (DNA copying errors) add genetic information, when in reality they lead to degradation and loss of genetic information.
(5) English peppered moths are not an example of evolution—gain of new genetic information—but of differential expression of genetic information that was already present with the species.
(6) Horse evolution —it didn’t really happen that way.
Except for number 4, which is a dagger in the heart of the modern theory of evolution, these are not reasons not to believe in evolution. Rather, they are purported evidences in favor of evolution that are either (1) not such evidence at all—e.g., “vestigial organs” and peppered moths—or (2) ambivalent evidence, e.g., “homology”, which could be common descent or common design, and the fossil record, which could be a series of snapshots of evolutionary history or ecological zones sequentially buried in the Genesis Flood, or (3) plausible evidence for evolution, but not as strong as they are touted—e.g., the fossil horse series and the fossil whale series.