Man, scientists really know how to trick themselves. I was looking into the peppered moths a little further. Even if there were no dark moths before the industrial revolution, they could have appeared over a short period of time in several instances due not to mutation, but to incomplete dominance. Since dark is dominant and light is recessive, incomplete dominance looks like this.

AA = dark
Aa = gray
aa = light

(In reality it would probably be more like AA and AB, but for simplicities sake it doesn't matter).

So even if there were no dark moths, they could have been spontaneously created by a mating between two gray moths quite often (but still be hard to find in the general population). This might explain their rarity. If they kept getting selected out, the gene for dark wouldn't have completely disappeared. So, when the pollution started pouring out, two grays mate, the AA happens to match up and since its dominant and selective pressures are gone, it takes over. So, even if there was no dark moth before the pollution, it didn't even mutate. But its called an 'abberant form.' Maybe scientists should learn a little bit more about their field of study.

This 'abberant form' excuse is just desperation on the part of scientists fearing the loss of their precious theory.

But it gets better, when you do a search for peppered moths online (or say in textbooks), this is still used as proof of evolution in action. That cracks me up. Its funny how much a world view can change your perception, and how that skewed perception can cause you to lie to others (even unintentionally). Seems evolutionists are doing what christians have been accused of for years. Whatever...

All right, I'm done for the night.