If you are a human, then you are an ape. You just contradicted yourself. And all of those objects were built by ape. Tell me which of the following traits that you do not have:
Apes are primates. Primates are mammals that share the following characteristics:
- hair instead of fur
- fingernails instead of claws
- opposable thumbs
- higher brain-to-body size ratio/high level of intelligence
- prehensility (ability to grasp with fingers and/or toes)
- padded digits with fingerprints
- binocular vision i.e. both eyes focus on one object (depth perception)
- reduced olfactory sense and dependent on vision more than smell
Here is some more from this source:
Hominidae | primate family
"Formerly, humans alone (with their extinct forebears) were placed in Hominidae, and the great apes were placed in a different family, Pongidae. However, morphological and molecular studies now indicate that humans are closely related to chimpanzees, while gorillas are more distant and orangutans more distant still. Since
classification schemes aim to depict relationships, it is logical to consider humans and great apes as hominids, that is, members of the same zoological family, Hominidae. "
Creationists cannot seem to understand. There is no other theory. Most of them refuse to even learn what is and what is not evidence. You have refused to discuss even the basics of science and your posts quite frequently. One cannot have a competing theory when one does not have a proper testable model. In fact by definition one cannot even have evidence without a testable model.
He did not imagine it. It was a conclusion drawn from the evidence. Evidence is a very powerful tool. Creationists avoid it because they can see where it leads. And right, evolution can never take the leap that creationists demand as "proof". They ignore the evidence and what the theory says and demand a strawman version of evolution, one that would ironically refute the theory.
Not as many as you think. And it is a bit more complicated than you seem to think. The transitions that we have are rather small these days. How many do you think have been found between Lucy and us? Please note, we don't need all of the steps to know that evolution happened. Since fossilization is a very rare event it is not expected that we would have all of the steps. But what we need to show is that there are no fossils appearing out of order. Modern man cannot be found before Homo erectus for example. But all of Homo erectus did not have to die out. They eventually did but there is often overlap when predecessors and successors lived at the same time.
No, branching is relatively rare. And we do not need links. That is a false claim. The found fossils only have to match the model. Can you repeat that? For example I do not need a picture of your grandfather to know that he existed. His existence can be definitely inferred by DNA and other evidence.
TLDR, but one correction. You are not a skeptic. You cannot be. Skeptics follow the evidence and you to date have refused to learn what is and what is not evidence. Until you learn what is and what is not evidence you can only be a science denier.