Question Evolution! - CMI's Rebuttals to Responses to Questions 9 through 15

 Please keep the snark to a minimum and focus on strong and well-sourced responses.

Introduction
On September 22, 2011, CMI posted rebuttals to various general objections to the "15 Questions for Evolutionists" that form the core of its '''Question Evolution! Campaign'''.

Have a look at the original article: Question Evolution! - "15 critically important questions that evolutionists cannot adequately answer" and our responses to CMI's latest attempts to rebut answers to its questions:
 * Question Evolution! - CMI's Rebuttals to General Objections to the 15 Questions
 * Question Evolution! - CMI's Rebuttals to Responses to Questions 1 through 3
 * Question Evolution! - CMI's Rebuttals to Responses to Questions 4 through 8

{{sbs|1= Answer 5: Evolution would stand even if we didn’t have a single fossil.

Rebuttal: Not all evolutionists would agree. The foremost French zoologist Pierre-Paul Grassé (1895–1985), editor of the 35-volume Traité de Zoologie, wrote:


 * “Naturalists must remember that the process of evolution is revealed only through fossil forms. A knowledge of paleontology is, therefore, a prerequisite; only paleontology can provide them with the evidence of evolution and reveal its course or mechanisms … that is why we constantly have recourse to paleontology, the only true science of evolution. From it we learn how to interpret present occurrences cautiously; it reveals that certain hypotheses considered certainties by their authors are in fact questionable or even illegitimate."

In any case, these critics would have us believe that evolution is sound with fossils or without fossils, it’s by chance and natural selection but it’s not a random accident! If your theory can explain any set of events, then it’s not scientific, according to many philosophers of science, because it’s not falsifiable in your eyes by any conceivable findings (although see also Self-serving SEC definitions of ‘science’).