[Coyoteman]

Name one shred of actual "evidence" for Evolution. Just one. Any one. Please.

I already met your challenge to "name 1" bit of evidence for evolution. Apparently you just waved it away. OK, here is some more evidence.

Figure 1.4.4. Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison (only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). (Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)

(A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
(B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
(C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
(D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
(E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
(F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
(G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
(H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
(I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man," 300,000 - 125,000 y
(J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
(K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
(L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
(M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
(N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

[BigTom85]

Don’t you just love how some of these ‘true believer’ types totaly reject science. You can show them charts, articles, and scientific data all day and they wil still reject science- they are not rational thinkers.

[Gargantua]

Those same maxillo-facial anomalies exist today in any number of human skeletal configurations/conditions ranging from mongloidism and elephantism to manchurian, african, slovak, etc.

WOW! We found a skull from a guy with big eyes and an overbite! SEE, there MUST be aliens! (< \sarcasm off >)

That some of these images might actually have been fossilized remains (some of which were "altered for convenience" {!}) is evidence of nothing more than man's propensity to twist data in his attempts to prove his pre-existing "theory".

However, it ain't evolution, and it sure ain't science.

You get no points for evidence, but I'll grant you 2 points for gullible creativity.

;-/