Scroll up. There have been several tweets linking you to the evidence supporting common ancestry between humans and chimpanzees. I guess you couldn't read one of the images so you just stopped reading altogether? Ignoring the evidence won't make it go away.

"Show me the intermediate species" Sure, let's look at some transitional series. (see below) "explain the Cambrian Explosion" talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/C… "ever changing “theory” of evolution" It adapts to new evidence, as any good theory should.

"per chance we are monkeys" We're not. Humans are apes. We share ancestry with monkeys. Kinda like how you and your cousin share a common ancestor (your grandparents). That doesn't mean your cousin birthed you.

I haven't had a problem presenting it. You've had a problem accepting/understanding it. Here's some more: humanorigins.si.edu evolution.berkeley.edu/evoli… tolweb.org/tree/

A clown who bastardizes the science he doesn't like or doesn't understand is hardly a step up from intellectual honesty. Maybe don't get caught up so much on avatars and focus on the content -- like the corroborating lines of evidence supporting common ancestry.

Well, sorry to ruin your GLARING #StrawMan, but the transition from reptile to mammal was indeed a very, very long time.

Look at that. You can't even spell Stephen Jay Gould correctly. This website is laughably absurd and glaringly biased. Dismissed.

Next time your argument against the prevailing scientific model for biodiversity includes references to probabilities and statistics regarding the likelihood of 'X' forming naturally, consider the following:

Reptile to mammal transition is well-documented. How does Prothero's opinion about punctuated equilibrium vs. gradualism affect the evidence?

"truth" lol

You're saying... the Smithsonian Institute's Human Origins Exhibit doesn't offer evidence for common descent? humanorigins.si.edu Sorry, but chromosome 2 is a dead ringer for common ancestry. Even if we had NO fossil evidence, the genetic evidence alone is sufficient.