[Thatcherite]

I am afraid I don't have the time or energy to go through the numerous fallacies one by one. But the following point in your long post caught my eye.

Evolutionists themselves disagree on just what the fossils mean and just how old they are. Consider the following:

What is interesting about this is that it is a prediction of ToE that transitional fossils will be hard to classify and therefore evolutionists are likely to debate this issue; whereas it is a tenet of creationism that there are no "transitional forms" or "ancestor forms" so creationists should find it easy to say whether fossil hominids are men or not men. However, here is how the creationist scholars disagree on the classification of fossil hominids. So, if there are no transitional forms, why can't the creationists agree on fossil classification?

[frgoff]

What is interesting about this is that it is a prediction of ToE that transitional fossils will be hard to classify and therefore evolutionists are likely to debate this issue;

Absolutely amazing. We can't even decide on how to classify the evidence, yet insist it is clear enough to support the theory beyond any questioning.