[alexander_busek]

Let’s suppose Mr and Mrs Chimpanzee gave birth to the first genetically human baby, (effectively a random large genetic defect that happen to be viable) when it reached sexual maturity, what did it mate with that would produce fertile human offspring, given the known genetic differences?

This passage is garbled / syntactically flawed and makes no sense.

Also, your whole argument - such as it is - is also logically flawed. It would be akin to my asking you:

"Let's suppose that Jesus Christ were to appear back on Earth today and claim that he wasn't really the Son of God..." or

"Let's assume that God suddenly forced every living human being to believe in Him, and made it impossible for them to ever stop believing or to commit any further sin..."

Your initial supposition is namely so implausible - bordering on shear impossibility - than any further discussion is contaminated from the get-go. Any subsequent "apparent paradox" or "self-contradiction" that you then claim to "reveal" - supposedly refuting your opponent's position - was merely the result of your initial flawed supposition.

Regards,

[Blueflag]

You’re trying too hard.

Net: fundamentally if the first 46 chromosome human, effectively a genetic error that was viable, was born to a set of 48 chromosome parents (chimps) ... then when that 46 chromosome human was sexually mature, there would be no genetically compatible humans to mate with.

Grammar be damned. God made humans, not evolution.