Evolution.. Are Man from Apes? Part 2

Is Evolutionism correct? Did we really evolve from ape-like creature? Like I said previously from my writing they have no clear basis that an ape-like creature is becoming of a man. When I mentioned about ‘missing link’ it is actually debatable. Standen noted half century ago, that this is misleading because it suggests that only one link is missing whereas it is more accurate to state that so “many links are missing” that it is not evident whether there was ever a chain. (Standen, 1950, p. 106) Scientists not only have been unable to find a single undisputed link that will clearly connect two of the hundreds of major family groups, But they have not been able to produce a plausible starting point for their hypothetical evolutionary chain (Shapiro, 1986) Scientist always leave questions open, Which lead to confuse people and make their finding a hearsay.
The methods that scientist are using to determine the age of archeological finds are obviously unsubstantial, showing a lot of discrepancies and inconsistencies.
The fossil dating system become inaccurate by this series of examples. Radiometric dating or also known as Radioactive dating is a method used to date archaeological remains, fossils and rocks.
Carbon-14 is a radioactive isotope of carbon. It is formed in the atmosphere by cosmic rays. All organism acquires an equilibrium concentration of radioactive carbon during its lifetime. If an organism die, C-14 will ceases. The half-life of carbon takes 5,600 years to decay and another 5,600 for another half-life and so on. Although this method is faulty scientist still embrace this method. The clear flaws here is that scientist are making an assumption that c-14 or any element has not change same with the element rate of decay. We all know that C-14 can only give dates in the thousands-of-year range and not millions.
Concerning this matter, Scientist didn’t take into account that they didn’t know the level of C-14 acquired by an organism before they recorded such history and how fast does the c-14 will decay. Radioactive is proven to fluctuates. Imagine the whole universe had undergone drastic changes but the rate of decay in an organism hadn’t change.

The other dating system that they are using is the structural change in body in a body’s amino acid. This is another scheme. They used two human fossils to analyzed and compared their two dating system. The result shows discrepancies between 39,000-59,000.Most of us remain ignorant and believe what scientist are offering us without questioning its validity. The result is ignorance, If you will just analyze you will notice that one of this dating system is inaccurate, or probably both.
Scientist is also documenting bones and fossils which is also insignificant in chain of evolution.You can not correlate anything you will dig in the ground to human development. It is not acceptable to link a species with a huge transformation to something that you just dig from the ground. You have to find the “transforming species” to make your claim evident.
Like I always said I don’t speak for creationist. I speak in search for truth. Life is not a fanfare that scientist would just give us anything and we will just grab and believe it. You have your common sense used it.