The theory of evolution works just fine for describing and explaining the change in the genomes and speciation since the earliest life. That is what it is intended to do.
To claim otherwise, as you do with your baseless assertion that evolution includes the Big Bang and everything since, is incorrect and, frankly, dishonest. Most of us arguing the evolution side know that what you are claiming is incorrect, but for those who don't know any better your assertions amount to a falsehood.
Well, here are simply 14 points out of thousands that reveal the idea of evolutionary transitions is just that: an idea.
1. What was one of the major objections Charles Darwin stated in his book, Origin of the Species, about his idea of evolution?
One of Charles Darwin’s objections (concerns) to his theory was that the fossil intermediates necessary to support evolution did not exist or could not be found.
2. What does most of the information in the public education system (textbooks) and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) state about the fossil record?
Most information in the public education system (textbooks) and the National Academy of Sciences state there are many intermediate (fossil transitional forms) available to support evolution. BUT, in fact there are no provable transition fossils.
3. What is significant about the different types of organisms scientists find in the Precambrian and Cambrian time periods?
In the Precambrian time period we find single-cell organisms. In the Cambrian time period we find very complex creatures such as trilobites, jellyfish, and sea shells.
4. Based on the Darwinian model of evolution what should we find between the Precambrian and Cambrian time periods? What have scientists actually found?
According to Darwinian evolution scientists should find single-celled organisms in the Precambrian with a gradual progression of complexity to very complex organisms in the Cambrian time period. Scientists have not been able to find any gradual progression (transitional forms) as they move from the Precambrian to the Cambrian time periods.
5. Many evolutionists claimed that the Coelacanth was an intermediate link between fish and amphibians. How accurate was this claim?
The claim by many evolutionists of the Coelacanth becoming an amphibian (front fins turning into legs) was not accurate. In 1938 a living Coelacanth was found and the front fins were still fins. The Coelacanth was not evolving, but is still 100 percent fish.
6. Many textbooks still document the horse as proof of evolution. Do all scientists agree? What information are textbooks not including?
Many scientists do not agree with the alleged evolution of the horse series. Even textbooks are confusing on the issue. Some textbooks claim there are many transitional creatures in the horse series while some textbooks suggest there is not a clear line of progression.
Also, the different horse fossils are often found mixed together in the same strata, suggesting they lived at the same time. In addition, textbooks fail to mention there are small, medium and large sized horses living today. Textbooks also fail to mention that the rib count, vertebrae count, tooth count do not go in a sequential order suggested by evolution.
7. Evolutionists claim that reptiles (dinosaurs) evolved into birds. What is their main fossil evidence for this claim and what evidence is used to support that it was a transitional form?
The main evidence used by evolutionists to support dinosaur to bird evolution is the Archaeopteryx fossil. Two of the main evidences used to support Archaeopteryx as a transitional form are that it had teeth and claws on its wings.
8. What evidence refutes Archaeopteryx as a transitional form?
Some birds living today have claws on their wings. Other fossil birds that are not claimed to be transitional had teeth. Birds “older” than Archaeopteryx have been discovered. Birds are so different than reptiles that there should be thousands of transitional forms (intermediates) if reptiles evolved into birds, not just a single alleged transition. Finally, why should evolutionists resort to misinformation (false claims: “feathered dinosaurs”) to support their claim of reptile to bird evolution if they are sure of their evidence?
9. What is the difference between macroevolution, microevolution, and genetic variation?
Microevolution is often associated with two different meanings. A common meaning is variation within kind. A second meaning is random mutations or errors in DNA. In both cases there is no evolution taking place. In addition no new information is added.
Macroevolution is when one species changes into a new species. This requires the addition of new genetic information.
Genetic variation means variability within kind. This is a case of using existing genetic information to vary within kind. All species have the capability to be “different” within kind, but not change into a new species.
10. Can natural selection be the cause of one kind of species to “evolve” into a completely new kind of species?
No, because macroevolution requires the addition of new information and natural selection only works with existing information. In addition, in many cases natural selection causes a loss of information, the opposite direction of evolution.
11. Most mutations are detrimental or neutral. Some mutations may be beneficial. Based on this information can mutations cause evolution to occur?
Detrimental mutations are the cause of disease, sickness, and death, therefore these are not a cause of evolution. Neutral mutations cause no change and are therefore not a cause of evolution. Some mutations may be beneficial but they cannot be the cause of evolution. To have evolution occur new genetic information must be added. There are no known beneficial mutations that have added new information.
12. Is bacteria resistance to antibiotics an example of evolution occurring today?
Bacteria resistance to antibiotics is not an example of evolution. Most antibiotics work at the enzyme level (protein) and therefore there is no new information added.
A second cause of resistance is that some bacteria already have the resistance and some don’t. The bacteria that do not have the resistance die out and again there is no change.
A third cause is that in some cases a dormant gene is activated due to an environmental factor. This is called a programmed gene expression. Since the activated gene for resistance was already present (but dormant) no new information was added.
13. Why is it not possible for one creature to evolve into a new creature, such as a reptile evolving into a bird?
There is no known mechanism that would allow for one creature to evolve into another creature. A major consideration would be that as the creature is evolving, the external features must change as well as many of the internal organs. In addition, as a creature is half evolved, reptile to bird, it can no longer do its previous functions, such as escape its predators, but it cannot yet do its new functions. At this point it will perish.
14. What is the best evidence/event for understanding the fossil record?
The best evidence for understanding the fossil record is the Genesis Flood.
Just the facts.