Do you think?

You cannot say evolutionary changes as if they are a given, an undisputed truth, yet you do! Which is the implausible assertion you make!! The notion that you think something that is incredibly put together functions, and you think it has a poor design, only shows that you don’t see all of the structural necessities involved. They said the same thing about what used to be called junk DNA or the design of the eye, what they discovered was that what they called junk is a necessity, and what they saw as a flaw in the eye was a requirement in keeping sensitive parts protected.

You still have no answer for the information storage or execution that allows for consistency in operation and error checking of all of the integrated systems in life. Unguided chance and necessity cannot produce something that only foresight and design can produce.

If you're going to default to your "all living things were created at the same time" dogma then there's no useful purpose in discussing this further.

It is no different that your they pop up one then another, they are different narratives and you think your narrative is beyond question? You have answers that cannot be questioned even though your narrative does not answer questions and it has no mechanism that explains how your narrative works beyond vague references and no one knows.

Denying modern evolutionary theory is not unlike insisting that the Earth is flat!

That is pride on your part speaking, I can render countless reasons for design, not random chance, producing what we see in life. At the same time, it is your point of view that requires a mountain of unsupported blind faith, even greater than the flat earth people; at least they trust their eyes, but miss what they cannot see. You have nothing like that; you have imaginary facts that are declared to you as true without being able to give reasons for your faith outside of your wanting to believe it.

Explain where everything came from, give a reasonable hypothesis for that, at least the flat earths say what do your eyes see! Explain how information storage in life occurred "naturally" without someone designing it. We know an intelligent being can create that; flat earthers can say, "Look at what our eyes see; you don’t have that." I can go on and on. You have blind faith, motivated purely by avoiding a Creator. There's no evidence, and what you call evidence could have a million other explanations for what you point to.

Like to define precisely what concept of a "creator-entity" you have in mind? What form does it take, what powers or attributes does it possess, what motivation, what 'plan' if any?

Read the Bible, it's all there. Very specific, very detailed, and it's stood the test of time. Quite unlike many scientific theories, some new information comes along and changes our understanding. Well, unless what we think is dogmatic, then no matter what information comes our way, we will refuse to change our minds; that isn't science's fault, but ours.

You don't seem to grasp it but this is where you're whole approach falls to pieces!

On the one hand you argue against some of the natural explanations for the Cosmos and the existence of life using counter-narrative style arguments such as 'well if random mutation is supposed to have caused life as we see it, explain how inert material can ever organise itself into a creature that's capable of consciousness?' but then you change direction completely and follow a path of pure religious dogma.

I remember someone using the term "bait and switch" for this kind of non-argument.

Isn't that what you're doing?

You give the false impression of being someone interested in arguing the essential points but in practice you resort to the pure dogma of the Creationist - I have a book and every word is true and it explains precisely how all creation came into being.

I don't find you entirely honest which is why I'm untracking now...

Do you know what dogma means?

I’d untracked too if were you. if you can not put up, shutting up is the best option.