Considering that EVE was created with one of ADAM'S RIBS shouldn't had had the size of a BARBIE DOLL?

Like all good lies, there is a fair bit of truth in the first one. There is not much fossil information on chimp ancestry because the environments in which chimps live and probably their recent ancestors lived are not conducive to fossil formation. However, it does not matter, since analysis of the chimp genome will reveal their ancestry if other apes and monkeys are sequenced.

"Amazingly all so called transitional fossils are fully formed... no half or partially formed fossils have ever be found" Read that again. Does it mean what you think it means? What does "half or partially formed fossils" actually mean?

Does it mean that no fossils of juveniles have been found? Does it mean materials that are only partially turned to stone? What does fossil mean in any case?

It means something that was dug up, from Latin "fosse" - a ditch. So do they mean remains of organisms that were found only partially buried? What they mean is that no characteristics of earlier and later organisms have been found in the one fossil.

Unlike the first lie, there is no element of truth in this at all. It is a direct and frequently told lie, no different from the lies about 21 December 2012. However there is a deeper lie in this.

The creationist is trying to convince the reader that evolution and the theory of it are based only on the study of fossils, and because the fossils record is patchy and scanty, then evolution must not be a fact. Firstly, even if was true that evolution and the theory were based on fossils, the scarcity of fossils and their patchy coverage does not prevent evolution from being a fact and the theory being substantially true. Secondly, and most importantly, evolution is not based on the study of fossils.

It has always been based on the differences and similarities between existing organisms and because of that, the existence of evolution, but not the theory, has been suggested or stated as a fact for hundreds of years before Charles Darwin was born. Since about 1910 evolution has been based on genetics and since about 1940 it has been defined in terms of genetics. Since 1977 fairly rapid analysis of genomes has been possible and it was automated in the 1980s.

This chemical analysis is turning up evidence of the real ancestry of all organisms that have been analysed so far. It is very difficult for creationists to lie about chemistry. People might not understand it, but they know it works because they see it's products every day.

Much easier to lie about things that people rarely if ever see - fossils. Young Earth creationism is no different from the 21 December 2012 end of the world fraud, a semi-orchestrated litany of lies. It exists to make money for a few like Ken Ham and only persists because the believers don't check what the leaders say.

It is a parasite on Christianity and Islam, but many Christian sects have managed to avoid being infested.

They're just parroting what they read on creationist websites. I guess they think that if they keep repeating "There are no transitional fossils" enough times, that the fossils will magically disappear. And yes, many if not all creationists misunderstand evolution to the point that they actually think it would lead to things like "the crocoduck".

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.