Truth Seeker

Be honest. If there is no evidence, please admit it. There should be an "abundance" of fossil samples of 'common ancestors', if evolutionists are correct, .... where is it? The answer should contain ONLY 'irrefutable' evidence. Good luck!

into the amazingly advanced people we have become today, from flint axe to space travel in just 45k years, while the Neanderthals, and our other predecessors did comparatively nothing in their thousands of years occupation of the planet?

Without resorting to the masses of 'evolution' biased, ambiguous, misleading and contradictory websites, that offer not a single shred of 'irrefutable' information indicating the specific whereabouts of ANY 'proving', without-a-shadow-of-doubt, fossil and/or lab evidence that the Theory of Evolution is now the FACT of Evolution, can any evolutionist PRODUCE, or indicate 'precisely' where in the world, what museum, etc,

is there ANY 'indisputable', 'specific', human intermediary fossil evidence. Also (avoiding those, 'easy way out', worthless websites), in your own words and from you own knowledge, please point us directly to where ANY 'indisputable' evidence is of ANY 'common ancestor'. Also, what kind of creature was it? And what was its name? Finally, please name ANY eminent scientist that has openly declared that he has specific Lab evidence that, unequivocally, 'PROVES' that is evolution is now "FACT". And I mean 'FACT' in the terms that the general public understands.

Do this and all the tedious questions and queries about the validity of evolution, from all us 'evolutionary uneducated' riffraff (the 'general public' actually, who fork out our hard earned money to keep 'your' highly paid 'scientists' in a job) that you find so tiresome, WILL STOP. We all can accept that it's a 'theory', but blindly and gullibly accepting it as 'fact', without 'proving' evidence, kinda sticks in the craw! (And, by the way,I'm not against scientists either - I'm one myself, so, please, stick to the question!).

It would also be useful and more acceptable if no fanatical, ignorant sarcasm and childish nastiness was shown here, that, unfortunately, some of you more dogmatic followers and defenders of evolutionism resort to occasionally, and since this has nothing, what-so-ever to do with religion and creationism and since I myself are not religious, I will consider any mention of it to border on ignorance.

Good luck to those of you brave enough to give an honest and mature answer. My best regards to you.

Accepting that, through the abysmal & TOTAL LACK of 'unequivocal' human mediatory fossil, & "common ancestor", evidence, in the 'Macro' field & the huge controvercy in the 'Micro field, which cannot hold up anyway, without the basic support of 'Macro-evolution', that 'the theory of evolution' is dead. Do you think, considering all the evidence of the 'SUDDEN' apperances of the various human species, amongst many other things, indicating intelligent design of some sort, that the argument for extremely advanced (by MILLIONS of years) 'extra terrestrial' involvement in human origin, is a more feasible 'suggestion' than, given the collossal, UN-GOD-LIKE imperfections we have to suffer in our daily lives, being 'created out of clay'?

This is a three part question. ALL are important to my research. (Please ignore the moral implications for now).

Firstly.

Is there any MEDICAL reason why a Human Mother COULDN'T give birth to the 'embryo' of a primate (e.g. a Chimp, which is said to be our closest relative), that has been 'transplanted' into her?

Secondly.

If it is possible, in any way what-so-ever, would the 'offspring's' DNA still be so different from its 'surrogate' Human Mother, that it could be misstakenly assumed by those who were not aware of the transplant, that she didn't actually give birth to it?

& Thirdly.

The same questions as the first and second, but in reverse, i.e. Could a 'Chimp' Mother give birth to a Human embryo, and what would the resulting DNA show?

The theory of evolution's strongest supporting "evidence", does NOT exist. It is the "Common Ancestor". There is not a single shred of evidence of such a beast/man, out of the masses of them, that must have been for us to be here. Where is the evidence? What kind of creature was it, half man, half ape? What is it called? Everyone knows these questions can't be answered by 'intelligent', 'knowledgeable' people and, since this "Common Ancestor", so crucial in proving the theory of evolution, turns out to be a figment of evolutionist's imagination, how can the 'theory (scientific 'fact') of evolution' possibly stand up and be believed?

I am NOT a creationist, nor any other religionist, just a truth seeker.

I don't mean to be disrespectful. It is a serious question. Because if he does have a penis, what does he do with it? Dose he drink, so he has to take a leak? Is he a virgin, if not, who's his girlfriend/wife?

Makes you think, dosen't it?