These are some of the common approaches used against Evolution that have failed to crack in any way the monopoly that the theory holds within the Scientific Community:
1) Don’t Care – (the most popular one) basically, let’s just focus on preaching the gospel and not worry about what the world does. It is because so many theists take this attitude that Evolution is so successful today.
2) Accept it – this might mean taking the theory as is, taking a theistic evolution approach, or embracing cognitive dissonance by claiming both evolution and creation are true simultaneously. Needless to say, surrender is sure defeat.
3) Lie to Ourselves- Pretend that Evolution is on the way out as far as scientists are concerned; that the scientific community has realized the theory is wrong.
4) Conspiracy – this approach places evolution alongside vaccines, global worming, etc. and is a quick, one-way stop to the lunatic fringe in the eyes of the general public. No faster way to lose credibility.
5) Hermeneutics – this approach is not concerned with science but only with making sure the Bible is interpreted correctly: 7 consecutive, contiguous days. It’s a failed approach because it is not addressing the problem. I don’t waste time with this approach because, if a person rejects Sola Scriptura they have bigger problems than evolution, and, if they accept it, no amount of mental gymnastics will bring them to anything more extreme than Young Life Creationism.
6) ‘The Bible Says’ – this approach attempts to disprove evolution with the Bible, something that has zero value with scientists.
7) Scientific Creationism – this approach attempts do disprove evolution using science. And, while this is effective in keeping Christians in the church, it fails in reaching scientists because in science, the only way to disprove a theory is to provide a better one.
8) Intelligent Design – this approach attempted to develop an alternative theory incorporating Behe’s Irreducible Complexity and William Dembski’s Specified Complexity but was never able to develop a concrete scientific alternative.
9) Legal – Some ID proponents attempted to use School Boards and the judicial system to introduce ID into the public school curriculum, thus influencing the next generation. These efforts proved highly unsuccessful.
10) Mainstream Science – this strategy attempts to do research and publish in mainstream scientific journals with the intent that at some point, when sufficient evidence is accumulated, an attempt will be made to introduce an alternative model. My main contention here is that this approach takes forever. At any given time, the scientists using this strategy feel that the evidence gathered so far is not sufficient to come out with an acceptable alternative. They feel that more evidence is needed before going public. And, 50 years from now, they will still feel the need to accumulate more evidence. (In this list, this is the only approach that has some degree of credibility)