I'm not claiming anything, but here you go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

Now it's your turn.

I'll just repeat, that the evidence we seek isn't just laying around in
50,000,000 year old textbooks.  The last 5,000 years leaves little
for us to mull over, the prior 50,000 leaves virtually nothing but
stones.

Really... a couple more screw turns from you guys and I'm gonna' end
up on the 6 O'clock news.  <g>   I only engaged you because you were
supposedly open to alternatives, but aspoused to have great faith in what
you believe at the moment.

I really don't think we should be looking to place burdens of proof on one
another when we're both without a great deal of justifiable, hard evidence
available to us.

So you admit your claim..

None of our upright, homosapien ancestors are originally from this
planet

..was completely without evidence. Let's proceed.

 I just thought I'd try to move us out of the gutteral sniping at one
another over flimsy beliefs and into the more astral point of view
for a moment.

Fine. Then what are you waiting for:

For people who have responded to stop beating me about the head and
shoulders with everything from anti-religious zeal to spelling issues ?

That's not an 'astral point of view' or whatever you were aiming at. Still 
waiting..

I said there were GAPS in Darwin's theory...

Point out the gaps.

That's almost as impossible as the theory itself.   Everything came from
the sea?  First it breathed, and then suddenly it had legs?  Then it 
climbed
trees and became ape, then it was (with no genetic recurrence) suddenly
a homo erectus?  I just don't buy it.

Gaps please. Or evidence for an alternative theory. Or at least an 
alternative theory.

"A scientific theory must have predictive value, must be internally 
consistent, must be falsifiable, and must explain at least those phenomena 
explained by the currently dominant theory."
( http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-welcome.html )

Show them.

This is becoming a redundant and without purpose...

So you admit your claim..

Evolution (of man) is a theory... a pretty flaky one, at that.  There are
also

some inexplicable short-term pattern changes that beg the justification
of external influence, or "steering" as you say. <
..was completely unsupported. Let's proceed.

The keyword is evidence.

The key word is 'narrowminded'...

I'm narrowminded of what?

Read the sentence again.  Is there some place where I said *you* were
narrow minded.  No, I didn't think so.

Let's look back:

N:
"You rely on faith, I rely on knowledge. The keyword is evidence."

DM:
"The key word is 'narrowminded'... and apparently, you are too accustomed to 
religious arguments to open up a bit"

So the questions remains: I'm narrowminded of what?

Jon has a good point to refute anything I had to say, in that so long as 
time
passes, evolution takes place... whether it's on this planet or elsewhere.
I can't argue that fact.   I _can_ choose to take issue with Darwin.

Willett likes to make jokes about and assault those who have any sort of
belief system other than one that follows the path of his own.  I thought
the alien parody was stupid, because I tend to place a great deal of
creedence in the existance of other intelligent life outside the confines
of Earth.  That possiblity alone, wreaks havok on the foundations of
both creationism and evolutionism.

..theories..evidence..

This is getting boring.