a view through example that evolution is flaud

A court case is in session and it's murder. Or is it?

there's a man/woman who's being accused of murder fur having been seen at the crime afterward.

The man/woman was found to have blood on their hands, so most would jump at the idea that this is proof that the man woman was the murderer. one lawyer says "your honor I thank you for taking a near impossible position between this case as it baffle's some since it's a case which is over 200 years coming.
The suspect is found to have blood on their hands and the witness are split on whether or not the party in question is guilty. Some say that the blood on the man's hands are that of the victim, others will say that it is his own blood or other. But this is not the dark ages of science we do have the ability to find nearly absolute resultes to find the blood as evidence or proof or just bad timing on the part of the suspect. The Prosecuting party has made claims such as these and is known to blow the case open on allogations alone and no real scientific evidence. But recently they've been wining to the contrary with Scientific Probability that leaves no conclusion to their contrary. the prossecuter has never lost a case because it's been unchallenged outside the court and has been found to condescend to the Judge and jury in previous court sessions because their evidence list and their knowledge and the process through which they come to the conclusion has been hard to explain for them that they chose to believe that nobody can understand, a common tactic to win a debate which is laughable to those who have taken the time to evaluate the prosecutur's claims. But they keep winning because nobody challenges them, this changes today.
I have here lab results not only from today's case but previous ones to refute all that this lawyer has represented in the past or at least bring it to doubt. you see your honor we do know through confession and officer testimony that the defendant had blood on their hands but do we truly know who's blood? we do today as I said I have the results. But our prosecution would have you believe that just because it's found consistant with previous cases' not just exclusive to the defendant but other's that this is a closed case and the defendant is guilty in every case. The DNA in which is the reason we are alive today is the determining factor. I know that some here may not be familiar with the word DNA and many may be less understanding how we care so much about such a thing but I tell you it is severely key to this case and previous involving the defendant.
The lab test results for the blood on the defendants hands came back showing 0% of the victim's blood and completely possitive for the defendant's. So you see not only is this evidence Void for being a factor in showing the defendant as being guilty but rather since it is the one real peice of evidence without proof that the prosecution had to help their case I argue that there is no means in which to pin anything on my client.
Your honor I know that you want to close this case early but I will continue to provide evidence that the defendant is innocent and in truth from previous cases' which is what we are truly here about. We are all quick to conclude on the side of guilt because we don't normally care about the details but since this is a court case we must consider any new evidence to shine light on the truth even in past events to show the character's of either side of the crime scene. Your honor since the Prosecuter has won on previous debates on the same accusations or worse in the past. Since the prosecuter has faught for similar cases before I will show that they are not fit for your approval in the past or future. The samples come from similar cases becaues the previous defendants being in similar appearance to the defendant today gives the people more reason to cast blame on hm but rather I have athe results showing NON of the previous cases to be positive for any of the defendants who lost their honor to this opposing party EVOLUTION. because in the past it's been won because the defendant as I said had been found at the scene with blood on their body. But the results I have show that this is only a case for DNA since none of the previous crime scene's involving animals and their breeding and death have any relation to the next scene but the Prosecution would have us believe in serial murder (connected evolved breeding/speciation) but since I have proof here that the evidence the prosecution won with is flaud at best shows that they are not worthy of being given any glory in their history rather with Theory becoming fact it no longer is a theory because they'd have had better evidence. But rather if they base everything soley on DNA and I can disprove their claims then they should be addressed for these crimes against the court and against nature.

The DNA results from the previous cases in which were before time of man show only similarities in the shape and nature of the Perpatrator is going to shock you today. The prosecution originally won only based on similarities and no real science and the court was shamed to call the prosecution trust worthy and allow them to keep their job but only through the complaint of the audiance did the Judge in those cases deem worth the prosecution. But your honor I urge you to not judge based on mass opinion because we know the world isn't flat. But rather judge it on logic, base it on absolute results. if you find me to be wrong then do so but I will know that I represented the truth rather than fabricating and twisting the truth as the prosecution has in the past. Even the best friends of the house in which all these murder's occured is being dismissed as having died or never existed (God/Jesus) but we're not here to debate that we're here for the case of the man being caught red handed and whether or not this and previous cases have a similar conclusion and if that conclusion is based on lies or fact.
The DNA results from previous case's as I mentioned before only shared that there was blood involved and that the perpatrator was similar in appearance. But this would work for the dark ages and since we have science at the level it is today we can prove that that's all it was, similarities. Your honor if I were to tell you that all previous blood from the older cases was found to be distant to non existant in their relation to the accused murderer's and that every case showed that the prosecution claimed at the time that the Perpatrator was always a relative to the last then you'd Laugh at me and them would you not? "remember you have no ties to either evolution or creation here so you can't pre-determin anything based on accusatoins" But this is the game in which the prosecution has played through the centuries. True that the Perpetrator's were always humanoid in form but does this mean they were all related and does this mean that they are all guilty of having some relation to the victim? NO but the voiceterous crowd and prosecution would have you judge based on mass opinion. Hear that the DNA from non of the previous cases was close enough to truly point at the defendants guilt but some came close to within 3% and the oldest cases were too old and decayed to get DNA. But recent studies show that less then 1/4 of 1% of DNA is absured to call true relation between test subjects. But the prosecution would have you believe that being 97% similar in DNA between the blood at the scene accusing and being related to the defendant is absolutely impossible. So the prosecution would have you believe that somehow the last case which is before recorded history is related to the last because of these vast gaps in DNA similarities that it proves anything of guilt. But if I were to explain that someone who has never NEVER been in my family lines had a 99% even similarity to my DNA would that prove anything other than they or I were fortunate to find someone random with similar DNA was a distant cousin that would be hard for chemestry to believe because as I said before less than 1/4 of 1% similarity is astronomically and impssible between NON blood parent results to share a commonality let alone as the prosecution would have you believe 1000's of generations between to share a 99.9 similarity. And they don't they rather omit that fact and have you astonished at the 97% and not explain to you that there's a 2% or larger gap between which in science requires you to have less than 1/4% to be related.
So what was the defendant doing with blood on his hands at the scene of the crime? well he/she confessed that they had a nose bleed before having rushed wildly to the commosion in the same house. But rather than beliving the defendant we'd call foul play and be done with it in the past. But now we have Carbon 14 testing and the like to act as dating measure's and these are all over the table and the prosecution only selected those which helped their case and left out the majority of the results which pointed elsewhere for time of death.
Your honor the only reason the prosecution has a job still is because he's backed up by a Majority of lawyers who play the same game as him and pull the wool over your eyes and the rest of society and don't care about the lie's they teach the next batch of lawyers. To the point that they can only see what they want to see and not the truth before them. But your honor we the rest of the people here and outside these walls hear the loud claims of these lawyers and don't bother learning for themselves of the truth. the proof is that since the evidence presented today and in the past has been found to be shaky at best that the prosecution be removed and the case be opened at a later date after proper study. BTW it wasn't long ago that you had to swear on the god of the bible that the court wasn't lead by lies through witness and evidence. But today we find that these lawyers and their public following have either abolished this right to stand under god or are plotting to. Your honor without the absolute truth we are back in the dark ages.


Pre-history is before confirmable undenyable fact through literature and evidence. anything before history is just that, PRE knowledge. You have to leap with a faith to say anything more than "I believe" which evolution has you do if you believe it. because their closest and most recent relative's to man is PRE-history and they need TIME to prove it took TIME for the differences and mutations to lead to Human's. Yet they dazzle us with a banner of Science because of DNA but Studies show that you can't be related to something outside of your immediate family if it has any more than .001% similarity or less. but the evolution want's you to believe that since we share 97-98% similarities with the best ape candidate that you'd believe the majority rather than the real science "BTW the .001 is an estimate I pulled because I don't remember the exact but it was less than 1/4% to be accepted relation of gene's" But folks majority in science is not everything. To give you some understanding of the 3% gap in gene's. one Single strand of your DNA has Trillions of pieces of information, "that's information that is required to make you, NOT me" and that's +1,000,000,000,000 and more pieces of information to make the human body. and 3% of even 1,000,000,000,000 is still 3,000,000,000 (billion) pieces of inherant information that they want you to believe is similar between you and an ape that they say lived MILLIONS of years ago. But Scientists show that even if you were to be missing less than 9,000 I think it was you'd be of no relation to the person you're matching DNA with. So the Scientists involve MILLIONS of years ago to abscure you to think that its beyond your comprehension and to oppose this means your too stupid. But this is all they really know and they lie about the rest.
think of it this way, if you had 1TRILLION pennies and you were to have a study showing that they all came from the same year. You dash all your pennies in a pile and you start reading every one of them. (mapping the Genome) you'd say yah I'm passed 1,000,000 (million) pennies and all but 300 of them say they were from 1886. Now you already know they didn't all come from the same time that's fine so you set out to prove they all came from the same mint. which needs even less. so you do the same thing never actually appoaching 1Trillion but you keep going with the latest in technology to prove that all the penies came from the same geologic location for the elements that created them. you find that less than 50 per Million are not from the same, but you need less than that to prove that (0%) lol because its ALL. so you have a geologist and a smelter and a prospecter and a Mint press worker all say that it's ok...... sorry Nope you need 100.00000000% to be absolute. This is your DNA were talking about remember. so if your black and a white man comes up and says hey I'm your cousin. and your skin color's are the farthest thing from each other but the DNA comes back 96% are you really going to believe him? I'm sorry but we have Baby DNA tests showing that you need more than 98% or better to be biologically related.

All we know is that Lucy and the lemur found recently DIED we don't know that they had kids and that those kids had mutant's and that those kids had kids etc... we don't know that these bones are not just extinct species of animals (we lose 100's of species completely every year folks). I'll give you and the scientists Millins of years ago or any time before man found out he could chizzle into a wall to make records. you still don't know that these dead things had KIDS. you don't know if LUCY was the last of her kind, You don't know if she was a mutant that she died with her Gene and continued with offspring. All you know is SHE DIED. in 10,000 yrs someone wants to trace a great person or murderer to see if they have living relatives and the only thing you find is bones of them, no records are known of them except their historic deeds, not their personal and lineage. they'd be crazy to say "said bones of the deceased because they have similar features to someone alive today(10,000 yrs from now) show that this person is survived" I'm sorry they wouldn't do that.



that's all for today class Please ask or accuse I guess but be smart and don't fall for what you don't know and say "Millions of years" Adam and Eve didn't live millions of years seperate from the garden and or each other which you conclude if you believe both evolution and the bible.