[reasonisfaith]

The change from adult to child is not an evolutionary change.

Please understand this. Back to square one. (We need at least a single piece of the puzzle—just one will do for starters.)

Fossils from 3 million years ago suggest discrete species, separated by immense gaps in genetic information. If evolution were true, these gaps would not be there.

[allmendream]

Sure it is, without a change from adult to child, imperfect replication that introduces variation, evolution is not possible.

If you even understood the first thing about evolution you would understand that.

Fossils from 3 million years ago suggest discrete species, just one that HAPPENS to look like what you would expect a human to look like that had only half as much distance from a common ancestor as a human.

If the evolutionary model were an accurate predictor of reality, then that is exactly what you would expect from fossils 3 million years ago. And there they are.

Just as when they looked for a shoreline around the time tetrapods were evolving, darned if they didn't find a “transitional” that looked like half a fish and half a salamander.