Harun Yahya, a prominent Turkish thinker and author, has recently published "The Atlas of Creation". Free printed copies of this book are being sent to many American scientists, but if you're interested a copy can be downloaded from the author's website:
According to the introduction "[s]ome 150 years ago, the British naturalist Charles Darwin proposed a theory based on various observations made during his travels, but which could not be supported by any subsequent scientific findings."
Apart, that is, from essentially every bit of research in Biology, Molecular Biology, Biochemisty & Genetics made in the last two hundred years. Darwin's theory is the unifying theme of modern biological sciences. For further reading, walk blindfolded into the science section of any book seller and randomly wave your hands about until you find a book. More than likely it will discuss, or rely upon, Natural Selection.
The introduction to the Atlas is further illustrated with a picture of a mid 19th-century microscope, captioned "[t]he single-lensed microscope that Darwin used reveals the limited and underdeveloped technological means of that era."
Here's a comparison of that early microscope with one of the latest pieces of British hardware - the Titan transmission electron microscope at Imperial College, London. They haven't refuted Darwin yet.
vs 
The wonderful thing about science is the more you learn, the less you know. Every new discovery pushes the boundaries of human knowledge; every piece of scientific research suggests a dozen new lines of enquiry.
Fancy a career in science? Well, if you're under sixteen and reading this in Britain then you've got a problem since the quality of scientific education in this country is rapidly diminishing. I suggest you hit the books, look out for extra curricular learning opportunities and save your pocket money for a private tutor.
12 August, 2007 - 21:12 JI think that you don't get the idea: what Darwin based his thory upon was nonsense, and is still nonsense: abiogenesis, Lamarckism, etc. He did not even know cells. They would vehemently deny any hidden code in the life, ahat we call today as genetics, as religious lunacy. (A monk, Mendel, discovered the still valid science of genetics, by the way) Darwin has been shattered to pieces again and again for many times. And they had the cheek to call new theories variant of variant of Neo-neo-Darwinism, just to stick by the old bearded chap. You see, you cannot say it was all rubbish to masses, when you spent a century and a half saying there has never been creation. What keeps Darwin as the foundation of biology is what kept Marx as foundation of social science in the Eastern Bloc: constant propaganda.
16 August, 2007 - 21:04 You're better off heading over to the Panda's Thumb if you want a debate about Evolution. I would however suggest that Darwin's place in history, and his theory's place in science, are rooted in utility, not propaganda. Natural Selection and Evolution provided the framework for an ever increasing network of Popperian hypotheses in the biological sciences. We have seen further, for we stand on the shoulders of giants. If you wish to make a critique of materialism, or you have some other socio-philosophical axe to grind, then by all means type away. That's an entirely separate domain from the biological sciences, and frankly a far less interesting one.
JMB
18 August, 2007 - 19:17 Religion IS the opiate of the masses