I say again, the evolutionists are looking at the wrong end of the "lineup" or 
whatever you want to call it of hominid and human types.  The problem is at the 
near end and not the far end.
<P>
Recent studies of neanderthal DNA turned up the result that neanderthal DNA is 
"about halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee", and that there is no way 
we could interbreed with them or be descended from them via any process 
resembling evolution.  That says that anybody wishing to believe that modern man 
evolved has to come up with some closer hominid, i.e. a plausible ancestor for 
modern man, and that the closer hominid would stand closer to us in both time 
and morphology than the neanderthal, and that his works and remains should be 
very easy to find, since neanderthal remains and works are all over the map.  Of 
course, no such closer hominid exists;  all other hominids are much further from 
us than the neanderthal.
<P>
An evolutionist could try to claim that we and the neanderthal both are 
descended from some more remote ancestor 200,000 years ago, but that would be 
like claiming that dogs couldn't be descended from wolves, and must therefore be 
descended from fish, i.e. the claim would be idiotic.
<P>
That leaves three possibilities:  modern man was created from scratch very 
recently, was genetically re-engineered from the neanderthal, or was imported 
from elsewhere in the cosmos.
<P>
There is no rational way to believe that modern man evolved here on Earth.  Only 
a wilfully ignorant person could believe that.<P>