Science is not always an exact science. 

I have no problem with the scientific method. As an Engineer I love it. It is true that developing theories and searching for evidence is part of the scientific method in seeking the truth, but there’s nothing conclusive when it’s in the theory stage like this. Evolution has been in this stage for 150 years even though there’s been an enormous amount of energy devoted to finding facts to prove it. Usually scientists don’t proceed until they do find it. But with evolution they confidently asserted by consensus of peers that they had it figured out many times and taught it as fact, only to find something that proved it false (see bloopers page). And so they developed another theory and taught it as fact and repeated this process. They just don’t have any solid convincing evidence for true (macro) evolution. So they have to interpret certain observations a certain way. The observations themselves don’t support evolution, they could just as easily show the intelligence of a designer. But they rely heavily on propaganda techniques to make their case for their interpretation (E.g. “everybody real scientist believes it” or “every peer reviewed journal agrees”). So be careful. 

Why did people drink radiation water?

A sad story of greed and coverup.

Wrong for 3000 years?

Why did the real Santa Claus (St. Nicholas) go to prison (true story).

Delicate cars (coming soon).

The story of DDT.