Evolution is a theory that is fundamentally based on progression. Human’s transition over time, from being so-called lower primates to fully developed species. Progression being the center of this theory, providing evidence of it becomes imperative to validate this argument. Declaring that a particular specie evolves from another without proof of a transitional phase (i.e. a human-like monkey, chimps, etc.) provides a very weak case.
Since there isn’t any evidence of evolution still taking place today, with certainty, we can assume that nature has frozen this process. And if it did, surely, evidence of a transitional phase would be evident today. For example, if nature should freeze the development process of children growing into adulthood, you will find evidence of the different phases within this progression. You would see pregnant women, babies, children, young adults, adults and also the elderly.
This is only one of the many flaws of the evolution theory; lacking the evidence of progression (transitional phases) that they claim exist. There are only so-called lower primates (monkeys, chimps, etc.) and fully developed primates (humans) but no in between, transitional species; maybe nature has selectively erased all of them. Some claim that these species became extinct, while the so-called lower primates still exist today; which means… the less evolved have, by far, out-survived the more evolved.
We have yet to see any evidence of a transitional phase, other than what is repeatedly fabricated (depicted), out of the imagination of the politically motivated minds.
Evolution theorists believe that because two species bears some resemblance, means that one must have evolved from the other. If evolution was conceived out of the necessity for adaptation, then we need to know, why has it stop at a point where humans are still desperately dissatisfied or still possess a need to evolve.
Today, they claim to have found the oldest human fossil, the origin of humanity. But what assures that..? One can only arrive at such conclusion if they have also found every human fossil that ever existed. Tomorrow, they might just find another… older than their current discovery, in another location, far distance away. And what about those that use to be but no longer exist, that has decomposed to nothing and cannot be discovered anymore?
Notice the obvious texture of the hair, skin color and face. None by which is in reference to any discovered fossil. It was entirely conceived out of someone’s bias mind.
Life is formed and existed wherever there is Air, Land, Water and Sunlight, which is not confined only to Africa. If plants, animals, insects, fishes and other life forms were able to exist without coming from a single point of origin (evolution), why was it necessary for humans to have this experience, one that is inconsistent with the rest of nature? If evolution was not necessary for the other branches of nature, why was it necessary for humans? Or do they believe that, for example, plants first only existed in Africa as lower life forms and then got up and migrated throughout the rest of Earth?
Everything in nature shares similar traits in some way, shape or form. Nature have always duplicated itself and created related versions of different species. This is common among the reptile family and even fishes, fruits, plants, etc. One variation can share resemblance to another and both exist at extreme distance apart, none evolving from the other.
The so-called lower primates, just happens to be the closest related specie to the human family. It only makes sense to say that humans evolve from them to those who share the same common political agenda.