Birds are supposedly 'living dinosaurs' and crocodiles were alive at the same time as 'dinosaurs' yet co-exist with humans quite well. As previously noted, coelacanths and wollemi pine supposedly did not live at the same time as humans, until they were found alive and well in the present.
What you mean is that you require a very specific example which has not been found to-date after having ignored all of the other examples that have been found that contradict your position. This 'argument' you are so proud of is known as the cherry-picking fallacy and is firmly outside the scope of rational thought.
"Setting up a straw man, and avoiding the questions you cannot answer I guess if that is all that you have you have to go with it."
Which is what you consistently do. Funny that you continually fail to recognize that.
OK then allow me to rephrase that, since Tyrannosaurus-Rex became extinct 63 million years prior to the appearance of the genus Homo, finding a Clovis point embedded in a T-Rex fossil would falsify the current evolutionary theory.
I did not mention anything about birds, crocodiles, alligators, coelacanths, or wollemi pine. All that misdirection and yet you still have failed to address my question to you.
How would you falsify id/creationism/cdesign proponents?
Can’t answer the question just fall back on the straw men and avoidance?
Apparently you don't understand what it means to engage in logical fallacy and actually believe that 'rephrasing' the position removes the fallacy. It does not. You can rephrase it all you want but that doesn't change the fact that you are engaging in logical fallacy.
"I did not mention anything about birds, crocodiles, alligators, coelacanths, or wollemi pine. All that misdirection and yet you still have failed to address my question to you."
Ignoring evidence that contradicts your cherry-picked example is part of the cherry-picking fallacy. That you insist on ignoring that evidence merely shows that you lack the critical-thinking skills required to recognize fallacy masquerading as 'argument'.
"How would you falsify id/creationism/cdesign proponents? Can’t answer the question just fall back on the straw men and avoidance?"
Attempt at the fallacy of affirming a disjunct is noted.