Are you still sucking on your ice cream, you stupid and sad excuse for an evolutionist? Only idiot evotards have a problem defining a human being.<quoted text> Same as the chimp we are ...hominini you can look that one up if you like.
A confirmation of a hypothesis can be generated on any basis from abiogenesis to the fall of Rome, and is testable and falsifiable, regardless of your ignorance and ability to be an evo parrot puppet.
Adaption is not what results in common ancestors between deers and whales. Adaptation gives you fitter deers and whales.
Creation is true if the genome is designed to maintain organisms within their familial group/kind. The fact that TOE is challenged by the validation of such a prediction is an added plus.
For now I am the one that has presented research that speaks to restrictions and limits to the genomes inability to adapt. Evos have presented their opinion and every side wind they can think of, and therefore have no more credibility than a squarking parrot that can repeat "they said so".
There is evidence in nature of the genomes limits to adaptability.
In gradually deteriorating environments, survival at lethal stress may be procured by prior adaptation to sublethal stress through genetic correlation. Neither the standing genetic variation of small populations nor the mutation supply of large populations, however, may be sufficient to provide evolutionary rescue for most populations.
There is empirical evidence that the genome has limits to its use of even beneficial mutations in a declining fitness landscape.
Genome deterioration: loss of repeated sequences and accumulation of junk DNA.
Genetic code of human race is deteriorating due to environmental factors
Evidence for Widespread Degradation of Gene Control Regions in Hominid Genomes
Diminishing Returns Epistasis Among Beneficial Mutations Decelerates Adaptation
Negative Epistasis Between Beneficial Mutations in an Evolving Bacterial Population
All data demonstrates an organism has limits to it ability to adapt. Breeders have known it for centuries but scientists don't let a little thing like direct observational evidence get in the way of a great story.