With all respect due for covering a contentious and really interesting area you've failed to examine the evidence in regard to the [exo]seeding idea.

Dawinistic theory, whilst providing a good model for basic evolution of set species, fails dismally at the larger picture.

Where do humans come from. Not apes. This is a pretty absurd idea and has me regularly rolling round the floor in discussions where ppl insist this is the case.

->Why did we 'evolve' little cute nails we have to trim?? Was it an 'evolutionary advantage' to chuck nail polish on??!

->Darwinistic fundamentalists haven't looked at a skull comparison between humans and apes/gorillas/monkeys. If they had done they would realise that a shift of that proportion is impossible. Whilst the human species may have a few chimp-like mannerisms [this is from environmental exposure to their behaviour and *some* gene splicing IMO] we certainly never 'evolved' from these animals.

->As renegade hominoid theorist Lloyd Pye states: the cheatah *never* evolved from anything. It's a BIZZARE mix of cat and dog. It is the only animal to get cat diseases [only got by cats] and dog diseases [ditto]. It's one of many examples of someone/thing experimenting with genetic manipulation at various points in history.

That's three reasons. There are loads more. A good mix of 'intelligent design' and exo-seeding is where it's at. And I won't even being on the Meier contact evidence which neatly meshes with all this.

Have you heard of Lloyd Pye? When you get time - locate his presentation at the sasquatch conference - I have a video copy if you want it.