Thanks for spending the time in explaining your views/ideas.
Thanks for having the intellectual honesty and rigor to not shy away from questioning whatever strikes you as questionable, whether it's something I say or from any other source.
The issue for me with your write up is that it is still full of assumptions and guess work which is ok for some but not for me I’m afraid.
Idk how to defend that except at the level of specific claims. Obviously anyone can reject anything by calling it 'assumptions and guesswork' at a general level, and you wouldn't know if they are right are wrong unless the 'assumptions and guesswork' were adequately analyzed and evaluated as such.
Assumptions and guess work are not scientific and definitely not facts.
As I mentioned, Einstein famously pointed out that he believes in the far-side of the moon despite never having seen it. There are many facts that we believe because we understand them. You've never been to Madagascar, for example (probably), but you accept it is a fact that it's there.
Another assumption for the total lack of any real bone evidence is that it never existed in the first place.
True. I haven't discounted that possibility.
You still haven’t explained why dinosaur bones have survived which are supposedly millions of years old! What a laugh that is when they have recently found hemoglobin/skin tissue in dinosaur bones.Sorry it just does not wash with me.Evolution is a nice fantasy story for the kids in my opinion,but that’s all it is.Bone evidence is needed...not guesswork.I wouldn’t bother looking for it though.
I could speculate different scenarios for how bones can get buried, petrified, or otherwise fossilized; but it would all be speculation.
Evolution is just a logical process whereby variation among organisms can persist and progress through multiple generations. You look different from your parents and/or siblings, just as they looked different from theirs, and your offspring will look different from you, and theirs from them, and so on and so forth.
So it is just logical that through long periods of time, the diversity keeps growing and also consolidating by homogenizing throughout the population, only sometimes barriers emerge where traits can't homogenize back through the entire population because of geographical or other barriers.
So if you think about the moths that got dark because of the sooty walls and later got light again because industry got cleaner, you can imagine that some dark moths were going into forests where there wasn't as much soot, and they were getting eaten and not reproducing, so the lighter-colored moths in the forests might have been faring better and if the two populations had continued to reproduce separately for long enough, they are eventually not going to be genetically capable of mating at all, and then you have two totally different species.
Again, my question to you is how you think these species were designed if not by the process of evolution. I think of evolution as God's tool for designing species, but I am interested in other perspectives, i.e. to see if they might make sense.