Anyway, the burden of proof is of course not on me!
It is on people who pray to the more then ridiculous evolution theory,
THEY have to proof that that non-sense is true! They can't deliver any evidence, hence it is not proven at all!
Mind you, I am talking about macro-evolution.
Well actually, no, that's not how science really works. While the scientific method requires proof that a hypothesis is supported, there's plenty of proof for both micro- and macro-evolution that has withstood counter-hypotheses LIKE THE ONE YOU'RE PROPOSING, and yet the arguments and proof points provided for that counter-hypothesis have been shot full of holes.
Because you are proposing a counter-hypothesis--that macro-evolution has never occurred--you do indeed need to provide specific evidence that there are errors (that is "falsify it's predictions") in macro-evolution in order to be taken seriously or even pretend to actually be engaging in science.
Now there are lots of different approaches to supporting the hypothesis that macro-evolution is false, but you need to pick one and support it. I don't care which one you pick, I've heard them all.
It all started within a secret-society years ago, It was al a set-up to lie to 'us'
....actually, I've even heard that one. Unfortunately, even that one is unsupported. How many years ago? Which secret society? Who is "us"? Why was it set up? What were its goals?
That's the kind of scrutiny that any hypothesis has to undergo, and has been thrown at macro-evolution as well, and it's still standing.
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance,