What If...?

[theStudent]

Currently, I am doing what was suggested by some on these forums.
I am researching information both for, and against evolution, and trust me - I am doing so objectively.
While I am still researching, I want to put this out, to hear the different views on it.

During my research I discovered that lately, just over the last decade or so, a lot of informations has been surfacing about fake fossils.
In fact it has now become common place for fossils sold at museums to be checked for genuineness.
I find this interesting.

Why now, is this happening?
Could it be that evidence as it always does, is now surfacing?

For example
Remember the dinosaur hoax - the one that was said to be put together using different bones?
It has recently been found out that it wasn't a hoax after all.
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/02/ ... ecies.html

That is quite interesting.

The fossils aren't the only things that were/are claimed to be fake.
There are the drawings, and pictures as well.
Right now, I am going through a very long document considered a case against some of Darwins picture illustrations.
But have you ever come across this one?

Pictures from the past powerfully shape current views of the world. In books, television programs, and websites, new images appear alongside others that have survived from decades ago. Among the most famous are drawings of embryos by the Darwinist Ernst Haeckel in which humans and other vertebrates begin identical, then diverge toward their adult forms. But these icons of evolution are notorious, too: soon after their publication in 1868, a colleague alleged fraud, and Haeckels many enemies have repeated the charge ever since. His embryos nevertheless became a textbook staple until, in 1997, a biologist accused him again, and creationist advocates of intelligent design forced his figures out. How could the most controversial pictures in the history of science have become some of the most widely seen?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Haeckel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Haec ... eks4-6.jpg
English: The pictures illustrate Ernst Haeckel's biogenetic law. In the beginning embryos of different species look remarkable similar, later different characteristics develop. The images initiated controversies and charges of fraud.

All of this lends to a possibility.
Consdering the fact that fossils can be faked, we must accept the fact that Darwin, and other scientists could have lied.

My question here, isn't whether he did lie or not, but rather, Does this not place evolutionists in the same position as the Christians they claim are believing in fables?

Consider:
Christians accept the Bible, as the word of God.
Here are just a few facts about the Bible.
With estimated total sales of over 5 billion copies, the Bible is widely considered to be the best-selling book of all time.
It has estimated annual sales of 100 million copies.
It has been a major influence on literature and history, especially in the West where the Gutenberg Bible was the first mass-printed book.
It was the first book ever printed using movable type.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible

Archaeological findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls, also called the Qumran Caves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

The evidence is there however, that the book we hold in our hand today (the Bible), contains information written centuries ago.

Atheist call the book fables - the reason I have yet to find out.
Maybe one of the reasons is that they have not seen God, or seen him write any book - whatever.
So they claim that Christians' belief in them and what they present is blind faith, and belief in stories.

However, is this not the case with those who accept the theory of evolution, where all they have to go by, is what scientists claim to be evidence?

By the way...
No one, to this day have seen them recreate the theories.
Any data they give you on species, is usually what already existed (at least what I have come across so far).
As regards other claims, all we have are pictures, and claimed fossils, which could have been edited.

So evolutionists are really believing what men claim - without any substantial proof of their claim.
How is this different to believing a book?

And what if Darwin, and others lied?


I'm just interested in you different opinions and thoughts, on the above.
Here is a nice short video of someone's opinion. Reasonable too.

[arian]

All right, this massive detour has gone on long enough. As one would have expected, arian has substituted a majestically absurd red herring in to replace an actual argument, and while I did gawk at it, there's no longer any meaning behind listening to what he has to say.

I'm especially interested in what moderators might have to say about how to engage with someone who believes gravity doesn't exist.

That's easy my friend, detours, derailing's are just part of BB-Evolutionists tactics, how else could atheists keep up the debate?

But how do you deal with someone who claims that Infinite, Eternal Creator God "I Am" doesn't exist. Who deny even Infinite and replaces it with an imaginary universe expanding in, .. wait for it, .. in "nothing"!?

How can you do that? Oh yes, by denying the very existence of both Infinite AND nothing, and replace one with Cantors attic, and the other as "not nothing anymore". See, that was easy, .. MK-ultra brainwashing. But arian doesn't want to play!

[arian]

I heard you can see the ISS sometimes with the naked eye, seen regular camera photos of it from earth too. Yep, the size of a big School Bus at 249 miles away, and can be seen with the naked eye. What you cannot see is the black weather balloon code name Mir flying in the Jetstream with a shiny toy hanging from it.

Well, I have seen the ISS with the naked eye. It looks like a moving star.

If you want to see it for yourself you can get all the info you need from here:

https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/

That fact that you think it's a weather balloon with a toy hanging off it tells us a lot.

An eye-opener right?

It takes many shots and props in the 747 to get that video you shown.

You ever free fall, hard to keep your eyes from puffing up, right? The guys/gals AKA Astronauts who are not puffy-eyed are photo shopped in.

God bless you my friend.

Please provide evidence for your claims. You're either in total denial or just trying to pull our chain. I'm starting to guess the latter given the ridiculousness of some of your claims.

You get YouTube? Look up all the ISS crew video News feeds and see for yourself. Make yourself some Pop-Corn and Prepare to laugh. (For added special effects, put on some Benny Hinn music as you watch.

[arian]

If I hired you and a bunch of other Landscapers to pee on my flowers (like the Tunnel Opening Celebration), .. of course my neighbors would think that! I mean they must have spent millions on this parade, they must have thought it out real good and planned it, and it is a tribute to the devil. I mean come on, .. even a child could see that they just love Lucifer!

You think the scientists doing the research put on the parade? Granted someone put on what you think is a worship ceremony, but the actual scientists doing their research did not. You weave a great conspiracy story though, I'll give you that.

You seen who was in attendance?

"The actual scientists" as you said are busy doing real science so the Masters could continue to rip us off Millions and Billions of dollars. Yes, I doubt the 'real scientists' would waste their time in the LHC waiting for a Big-Bang, that part is left for the Rulers, the Priests and Magicians.

LOL, .. here, let's build a 3 billion dollar calculator so we could get some insights into the fundamental laws of mathematics!

LOL indeed. Let's ignore reality and make up a cool story. You win the story contest.

I was referring to the reality of the LHC, it is the science behind it that is magical.

I believe it is YOU who doesn't understand. Science has been taking things apart, rocks etc. to see what's inside for the past 6,000 years, what they're doing at the LHC is hoping that once they find the sub-atomic God-particle, a parallel universe will Big-Bang into being, .. based on a Jesuit Priests epiphany!

That's another great story. Where do you get this stuff?

at 666CERN News and prayer requests.

Were you hoping to create your dads watch (or whatever you took apart) when you took it all apart? No, .. because you have far more sense than that. But the gods at 666CERN lack even that much sense, so now you know why they dance like that, with music like that.

Umm, the scientists aren't dancing, they're busy doing research. If you want to actually know what they're up to maybe check out some of the actual published results instead of searching for odd youtube videos of dancing.

I know what real scientists are doing, I was referring to 666CERN and their LHC Temple of Durga.

You know very well that Lucifer is the god of this earth, and he has chosen a nation to control the whole world, his world, and as the Bible says: "They ALL worship the beast!" even sacrificing their own children, torturing them slowly for years with deadly chemical and radiation. Go visit any Children's Cancer Hospital, and you will see what I mean!

No I don't know that. Are you seriously calling advanced chemotherapy and radiation treatments a form of sacrificing children by torture?

Most definitely, I put my life on it.

Would you rather they waste away at home while people dance around and wave their hands over them?

If they weren't Forced, threatened to be taken from the parents for negligence, those children, 99% of them wouldn't be dying of cancer caused by the advanced chemotherapy and radiation.

You're seriously insulting the scientists and medical professionals who are trying to save the most precious of our species.

You make my blood boil, .. "trying to save the most precious of our species", just like the nurses at the execution Centers, big smile, sweet voice, .. and I've seen what they were doing to my newborns with my own eyes. Now my doctors are after me again, to go under an hour worth of X-Ray procedure. So Pleeeese don't.

Maybe you should go talk to some cancer survivors and see how they feel about it?

There you go again, ... I have talked to some so called "Cancer Survivors", after shaving their heads to pretend they are going through the therapy. And what do you know, after two to three shaves, they are free from cancer.

I can usually just laugh off your delusions, but this one is perilously close to causing me to earn a warning or two. You're a great button pusher, I'll give you that.

Yes you are a great button pusher, but you will not get me, I have learned to control my emotions, and also to put my faith in God more, .. He Will Repay!!!!

Like the 747 ISS, .. I laugh every time I see the passengers AKA Astronauts red puffy faces as they're trying to hold their stomach down on each free fall.

I like their movies better, like "Gravity", .. what proper name and a perfect pun because it doesn't exist (gravity that is), just like in the movie.

Well what little credibility you had is completely gone now. You think the ISS is a fake and gravity isn't real? Are you too scared to actually borrow a telescope and look at the ISS yourself?

Funny you said that. You see a few years ago THEY killed my friend with High Doses of X-Rays to his brain, my dear, dear atheist friend for over 30 years who would often point out my faults and hypocrisy as: "See, that's your Christian upbringing showing through!"

He was into Astronomy, and his wife gave me one of his Telescopes, a 10 inch Celestron. I used it to look down the Grand Canyons a mile deep, and could barely make out people rafting on the Colorado river.

The ISS (just a tad bigger than a bus) is supposedly 249 MILES up, and people take pictures of it with their camera zoom lens, what does that tell you?
You know what that tells me when they ask me to look at the ISS with my naked eyes? That they think I'm a moron, nothing but an animal, an evolving ape or something. Not nice at all.

I have seen much more than the "Weather balloon launched ISS", and it is all reassuring all my doubts regarding snake tongue NASsssA and what they see through the Vatican's LUCIFER Telescope, and 666CERN's LHC Temple presented to us by atheists Lady Gaga and the Django Morgan Freeman.

Or maybe you think Lucifer will hold a cardboard cutout in the sky while you do it thereby confusing you into believing? I'm not even sure what the gravity comment is about. What exactly do you think causes things to fall down? Demons? That's some good kool-aid you must be drinking.

Oh, so you know about the shiny cardboard cutout ay? Also can do the UFO tricks combined with laser technology:
"Aliens, we are being attacked by aliens!" lol. But no worry, our New World Order is ready for us aliens, billions are spent on the "Alien Police" and their Alien-drills in big cities.

Jesus was right, we are like sheep for the slaughter, only before Satan no human is safe.

Evolution is evolution, it had a start, where do you want the start, .. 13.7 billion years, 10 billion, 6 billion, 4.2 billion, .. where?

Doesn't matter where it starts. Evolution is about how organisms change over time, not how they got there in the first place. Nice try though.

Oh please tell me; "How do organisms change over time?" Does this have anything to do with "speciation over a very, very long time"?

Yep, we all change over time, .. it's our fallen nature.

In any case speciation doesn't happen during an animals lifetime, so it really doesn't matter where you start evolution, it never happened, by your own story.

You clearly have no idea what 'my story' is. According to evolution speciation doesn't happen during any one organisms lifetime either. No evolution happens during the lifetime of the organism in question. Reproduction is required.

Oh, so speciation happens after reproduction? Hey, so the croc-a-duck is true, a crocodile will eventually lay a duck egg!?

Looking forward to your next round of conspiracy theories.

Peace out.

Lol, .. theories, .. as if?

Take care my old debating friend.

[benchwarmer]

No I don't know that. Are you seriously calling advanced chemotherapy and radiation treatments a form of sacrificing children by torture?

Most definitely, I put my life on it.

Well, as long as you are only putting your own life on it that's fine. We're all free to choose our own medical care.

Would you rather they waste away at home while people dance around and wave their hands over them?

If they weren't Forced, threatened to be taken from the parents for negligence, those children, 99% of them wouldn't be dying of cancer caused by the advanced chemotherapy and radiation.

Now you're positing that the cancer came from the treatment? How were they diagnosed in the first place? Or do you think Xrays, MRIs, CAT scans etc are all voodoo as well?

You're seriously insulting the scientists and medical professionals who are trying to save the most precious of our species.

You make my blood boil, .. "trying to save the most precious of our species", just like the nurses at the execution Centers, big smile, sweet voice, .. and I've seen what they were doing to my newborns with my own eyes. Now my doctors are after me again, to go under an hour worth of X-Ray procedure. So Pleeeese don't.

Never mind, I think you just answered my previous question. No idea what you mean by 'execution centers'. I hope (and I'll even pray if it helps) that your newborns turned out fine. What exactly is it you think the doctors did to them? And even if they did do something bad - which I hope not! - how does that have anything to do with diagnostic imagery?

Sorry to hear you have something that requires medical attention. Hopefully you will be ok. Like I said above, we are all free to choose our own care. If you don't trust modern medicine, there's nothing I can say that will change your mind. I just hope it works out in the end. I truly do.

Maybe you should go talk to some cancer survivors and see how they feel about it?

There you go again, ... I have talked to some so called "Cancer Survivors", after shaving their heads to pretend they are going through the therapy. And what do you know, after two to three shaves, they are free from cancer.

So shaving their heads cured them? I thought the treatments were giving them cancer? You gotta make up your mind here. Your conspiracy theories are starting to conflict.

Funny you said that. You see a few years ago THEY killed my friend with High Doses of X-Rays to his brain, my dear, dear atheist friend for over 30 years who would often point out my faults and hypocrisy as: "See, that's your Christian upbringing showing through!"

He was into Astronomy, and his wife gave me one of his Telescopes, a 10 inch Celestron. I used it to look down the Grand Canyons a mile deep, and could barely make out people rafting on the Colorado river.

The ISS (just a tad bigger than a bus) is supposedly 249 MILES up, and people take pictures of it with their camera zoom lens, what does that tell you?
You know what that tells me when they ask me to look at the ISS with my naked eyes? That they think I'm a moron, nothing but an animal, an evolving ape or something. Not nice at all.

I have seen much more than the "Weather balloon launched ISS", and it is all reassuring all my doubts regarding snake tongue NASsssA and what they see through the Vatican's LUCIFER Telescope, and 666CERN's LHC Temple presented to us by atheists Lady Gaga and the Django Morgan Freeman.

Ok... First, sorry to hear about your friend.

The rest of that is hard to respond to with a straight face... so I'll just stick to the ISS pictures.

Someone took some pictures of the ISS with their camera and what is the problem with that? It probably looks like a big white dot unless they've used some kind of tracking telescope. Here's a link on how to take some ISS pictures

http://soggyastronomer.com/how-to-photo ... e-station/

Oh, so speciation happens after reproduction? Hey, so the croc-a-duck is true, a crocodile will eventually lay a duck egg!?

How you get to croc-a-duck from reproduction I'll never know. A quick google search will sort you (and curious readers) how speciation happens. It's been discussed before in other (and maybe even this) thread.

What I'm starting to find truly shocking is that no Christians are willing to wade into this discussion and straighten you out. I don't even think theStudent believes some of the stuff you are typing, but seems to be letting it all go by. Maybe most Christians generally don't frequent this sub forum. If a non theist starting making some of these claims I would be all over them. I'm really surprised a certain pediatric nurse hasn't stomped all over you (well maybe lightly tread upon given his/her gentle persuasion).

[marakorpa]

[Replying to post 1 by theStudent]

I am an old bloke, 78 and I am trying to understand the activity of DNA and RNA. To it is impossible for me to accept that these things happen by chance, and would have had to been included in that mysterious single in the Primordial Slime.

The simple fact that DNA makes protein and DNA needs protein to function, or summit like that.

I would love to send you the reading matter I have as it does exactly what you are researching and that is comparing evolution and creation.

Don't get up in the false claims of the evolutionists about fossil proof of critters changing from summit to another summit, consider this:

The Evos claim that the Cambrian explosion was the age of the fossils that proves their claims.

Now you are at one end of a football field, you would have to walk to the following try line to In terms of from the beginning of evolving to the Cambrian explosion, then one step further and you would be out of it again, and into historic times.

There are no discoveries that show the slow change of life forms in the fossils, the Cambrian age is not long enough in years to cater to this theory. However fossil records do show that the fossils appeared very close together suggesting that there was an sudden arrival of animals, plants and insects etc.

We cannot deny that there were dinosaurs, the majority of which were small in size with only about 8 (Ithink) of the monstrous size of the one recently discovered, but check this out, they were all herbivores...The Bible says that it wasn't until after the flood that meat was given as food.

Darwin admitted that the more he saw the more he considered that all the life must have had some superior designer, he even said he would not discount the creation concept.

Scientists of today do not use Darwin's theory, and say that they only talk about him out of respect.

You will find all sorts of Evolution theories, there is not just one as there is for the creation story, and all the different theorists are arguing with each other, and no matter what, if they claim that the Big Bang made life happen, they will not tell you where the big bang came from, and they even say there never was nothing??????

Good Luck Mate, at least you are having a bit of a go, hey?

[marakorpa]

Look for Chuck the duck.

I can only laugh at a duck and a croc mating or sharing an egg nest....Snap, Gulp, Hmmmmm! Got another one of those feathery things?

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 1 by theStudent]

I am an old bloke, 78 and I am trying to understand the activity of DNA and RNA. To it is impossible for me to accept that these things happen by chance, and would have had to been included in that mysterious single in the Primordial Slime.

Personal incredulity is insufficient to form an argument against the theory of evolution. You have countless resources available to help you gain a better understanding of DNA and RNA. All you have to do is ask someone.

But Creationists don't ask questions because they want to increase their knowledge. They ask loaded questions, ignore the answers that scientists give, and then go to their church leaders for more talking points.

The simple fact that DNA makes protein and DNA needs protein to function, or summit like that.

Yep, modern DNA requires modern proteins, which help in the function of modern cells. No big mystery there.

I would love to send you the reading matter I have as it does exactly what you are researching and that is comparing evolution and creation.

Go ahead and start a debate topic, there are quite a number of us "evolutionists" who would be delighted to get involved in a fresh topic.

Don't get up in the false claims of the evolutionists about fossil proof of critters changing from summit to another summit, consider this:

Your adorably imprecise jargon may make it more palatable to listen to you, but it also leaves a secondary effect of making you seem like you are either uneducated, or you don't put much stock in professionalism; I'll make a special effort to slog through and treat you like an equal, since that is the charitable position to take in a debate.

The Evos claim that the Cambrian explosion was the age of the fossils that proves their claims.

No, the Cambrian Explosion is purported to be the time period in which most major animal phyla appeared; that is, when the diversity of life on earth rapidly increased. Do you know why that is? Because every rock layer below that had substantially less diverse organisms (as indicated by fossils), and every rock layer after had more diverse organisms (as indicated by fossils). Are you trying to argue that the biodiversity on earth has remained constant? Do you have evidence?

Now you are at one end of a football field, you would have to walk to the following try line to In terms of from the beginning of evolving to the Cambrian explosion, then one step further and you would be out of it again, and into historic times.

Indeed, it's very likely that we have a long way to go before we can know what exactly caused the formation of so many animal phyla in a "short" timespan, relative to the age of the earth.

There are no discoveries that show the slow change of life forms in the fossils, the Cambrian age is not long enough in years to cater to this theory. However fossil records do show that the fossils appeared very close together suggesting that there was an sudden arrival of animals, plants and insects etc.

The speed at which evolution takes place is well within the model's predictions. You already acknowledge that there was a sudden increase in biodiversity around this time, you just don't demonstrate the desire to know how science might actually explain it.

We cannot deny that there were dinosaurs, the majority of which were small in size with only about 8 (Ithink) of the monstrous size of the one recently discovered, but check this out, they were all herbivores...The Bible says that it wasn't until after the flood that meat was given as food.

A decade ago, a lot of Creationists were doing everything they could to deny that dinosaurs existed. I'm glad they've at least gotten rid of that hilarious lie.

You are making a false claim about the dietary habits of dinosaurs. Scientists, who have used actual data and real world knowledge, have deduced that Albertosaurus, Allosaurus, Coelophysis, Compsognathus, Deinonychus, Dilophosaurus, Eoraptor, Giganotosaurus, Megalosaurus, Suchomimus, Tyrannosaurus rex, Unenlagia, Utahraptor. Velociraptor, Yangchuanosaurus, and many others all were carnivorous dinosaurs.

Your church leaders and fellow Creationists have an agenda forcing them to make up these lies. They are unable to defend these claims when we get into the nitty gritty aspects of it. Makes you wonder why they try so hard when their tactics come across as desperate and manipulative.

Darwin admitted that the more he saw the more he considered that all the life must have had some superior designer, he even said he would not discount the creation concept.

Since I don't really care about this portion, I'm not even going to contest this. It could be a quote mine, it could be a fabricated quote, but whatever it is, it has no bearing on the theory of evolution. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Scientists of today do not use Darwin's theory, and say that they only talk about him out of respect.

Sure, we respect people who jump-start a peek into the underlying behavior of life on earth. His contributions were valuable.

You will find all sorts of Evolution theories, there is not just one as there is for the creation story, and all the different theorists are arguing with each other, and no matter what, if they claim that the Big Bang made life happen, they will not tell you where the big bang came from, and they even say there never was nothing??????

The theory of evolution is the encompassing theory that attempts to explain how life changes over time. The consensus of scientists all agree that it is the most likely explanation for the diversity of life on earth. They are not "arguing" with each other, they are proposing independent models that attempt to line up with the data they've collected; the end result is to take all of their data, form a model that has the highest rate of accuracy, and have that become the standard.

No scientist claims that "the Big Bang made life happen." You have demonstrated that:

• You do not understand what scientists say.
  You don't care what scientists have to say.
  You will use false claims about scientists.
  You will rely on non-scientific sources to inform you about what scientists have to say. Ergo, you are relying on biased sources to warp your view of other parties.

Look for Chuck the duck.

I can only laugh at a duck and a croc mating or sharing an egg nest....Snap, Gulp, Hmmmmm! Got another one of those feathery things?

No theory predicts that Chuck the duck exists. You've actually made a huge mistake revealing your hand like this. The crocoduck has become the icon for failed Creationist arguments, and is regarded with ridicule because it is so far removed from any kind of tangible argument. It is a misrepresentation of science, meaning it has no relevance in scientific discussions. Do better.

Good Luck Mate, at least you are having a bit of a go, hey?

It's a shame that it couldn't measure up. But if you're the next iteration of Creationist to wander onto this forum, be my guest. We've been running low on reserves for weeks.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 1 by theStudent]

I am an old bloke, 78 and I am trying to understand the activity of DNA and RNA. To it is impossible for me to accept that these things happen by chance, and would have had to been included in that mysterious single in the Primordial Slime.

The simple fact that DNA makes protein and DNA needs protein to function, or summit like that.

I would love to send you the reading matter I have as it does exactly what you are researching and that is comparing evolution and creation.

Don't get up in the false claims of the evolutionists about fossil proof of critters changing from summit to another summit, consider this:

The Evos claim that the Cambrian explosion was the age of the fossils that proves their claims.

Now you are at one end of a football field, you would have to walk to the following try line to In terms of from the beginning of evolving to the Cambrian explosion, then one step further and you would be out of it again, and into historic times.

There are no discoveries that show the slow change of life forms in the fossils, the Cambrian age is not long enough in years to cater to this theory. However fossil records do show that the fossils appeared very close together suggesting that there was an sudden arrival of animals, plants and insects etc.

We cannot deny that there were dinosaurs, the majority of which were small in size with only about 8 (Ithink) of the monstrous size of the one recently discovered, but check this out, they were all herbivores...The Bible says that it wasn't until after the flood that meat was given as food.

Darwin admitted that the more he saw the more he considered that all the life must have had some superior designer, he even said he would not discount the creation concept.

Scientists of today do not use Darwin's theory, and say that they only talk about him out of respect.

You will find all sorts of Evolution theories, there is not just one as there is for the creation story, and all the different theorists are arguing with each other, and no matter what, if they claim that the Big Bang made life happen, they will not tell you where the big bang came from, and they even say there never was nothing??????

Good Luck Mate, at least you are having a bit of a go, hey?

If you think the Cambrian era is what proves evolution, you have a lot to learn. We have mapped the human genome and many other genomes at this point, so technically, fossils are not needed to know that we all share common ancestors and yet that is what your post seems to focus on.

Either way, I would like to ask you to give us your best explanation for the species we see both now and in the fossil record.

I would like to compare that to what I know about evolution. Do I really have to pretend that T-Rex was a vegetarian though? At some point, you need to turn the silly down.

Can I guess that you believe that animals can make micro changes? If so, what is the mechanism that is in play that stops the changes from an animal becoming a new species? It's one thing to admit that they change, but to then conclude that the changing has to stop at some point needs to be justified.

Then there's retro viruses, but at this time I'm just beating a dead horse.

Humans have been around for about 200,000 years. There is no longer an excuse to invent or subscribe to man made creation stories to explain what we now know.

Like it or not, evolution is a fact and also a theory.

[Clownboat]

Look for Chuck the duck.

I can only laugh at a duck and a croc mating or sharing an egg nest....Snap, Gulp, Hmmmmm! Got another one of those feathery things?

What is this talk about a duck and a croc mating, or sharing an egg nest?
You have shown that you need to source new places to get your information about evolution.

Perhaps I can explain it a little differently.
Evolution is a gradual process that works on populations. For example, asking when was the first truly human generation would be like asking who spoke English first. Everyone who speaks English learned it from someone else who speaks English, often a parent. No one gets up and decides, "I'm going to speak a whole new language." However, 1,000 years ago, no one spoke English.

In 1020, King Cnut to the English people wrote:
Cnut cyning gret his arcebiscopas and his leod-biscopas and urcyl eorl and ealle his eorlas and ealne his eodscype, twelfhynde and twyhynde, gehadode and lwede, on Englalande freondlice.
And ic cye eow, t ic wylle beon hold hlaford and unswicende to godes gerihtum and to rihtre woroldlage.
Ic nam me to gemynde a gewritu and a word, e se arcebiscop Lyfing me fram am papan brohte of Rome, t ic scolde ghwr godes lof upp arran and unriht alecgan and full fri wyrcean be re mihte, e me god syllan wolde.
Nu ne wandode ic na minum sceattum, a hwile e eow unfri on handa stod: nu ic mid godes fultume t totwmde mid minum scattum.
a cydde man me, t us mara hearm to fundode, onne us wel licode: and a for ic me sylf mid am mannum e me mid foron into Denmearcon, e eow mst hearm of com: and t hbbe mid godes fultume forene forfangen, t eow nfre heonon for anon nan unfri to ne cym, a hwile e ge me rihtlice healda and min lif by.

This language evolved into Modern English with each generation perceiving that they spoke the same language as the previous one. No one was speaking a different language than their parents, there is no single generation where you can say, "this is where Modern English starts." Yet, the language of a 1,000 years ago is completely unintelligible to us.

This is the same with biological evolution. Each generation is the same species as its parents. There is no single generation where one can say, "this is where modern humans start." Yet, over thousands of generations, the chimpanzees and the humans have evolved in different directions.

[TheBeardedDude]

It would be very easy to show that fossils and their evolutionary information are untrue, go find the evidence. The fossils are literally just sitting in the rocks waiting.

Aside from faked fossils that are sold to make money, the notion that the fossil record itself is falsified is improbable and implausible.