You might do much better if you allow someone to read your draft posts. It's tough to see you invest so much thought into postings that do not cover the ground you think they cover and which are not internally consistent.
Your comment about Kettlewell's conclusion that the fossil record cannot be evidence for evolution is incorrect, and not by just a little bit. The fossil evidence can be scanned and assessed from any number of angles, the two principle ways being:
1) is the fossil evidence consistent with any known property of flood dynamics? No. I received a letter from Henry Morris himself back in the late 1970's that pretty much conceded the point, but he hoped I would consider joining with his group to find a solution.
2) the other way is to show any number of times that animals that don't appear to have existed at all when dinosaurs died, suddenly appear in the middle of the fossil stack ... and they appear in the sequence that Evolutionary Theory proposes that they would:
a] For example, while the Bible says that birds were created before land animals, fossil evidence shows that at a time when fish were the most developed creatures on Earth, there are no birds in evidence. Further, when tetrapods derived from fish life, were the most developed creatures on dry land, there were still no birds. Further still, birds do not appear until after dinosaurs have died off, with the Avian branch (comprised of quite small specimens) being the surviving branch.
b] Per theoretical expectations, large mammals do not apper in the fossil stack until the dinosaur rivals are gone.
c] Per theoretical expectations, whales do not appear in the fossil stack until large mammals have become a dominant life form, and the absence of marine reptiles has allowed the fish populations to swell.
d] Per theoretical expectations, bats do not appear in the fossil stack until their rodent predecessors were able to flourish in the absence of dinosaurs.
e] Per theoretical expectations, mammalian speciation in Australia is distinctly different from anything we find anywhere else on Earth -- because Australia's drift into the middle of the ocean kept evolutionary trends within Australia isolated from other influences.
Regardless of what any of the critics and counter-critics say, the moth experiment pales in comparison to a very recent demonstration of evolutionary processes put on by Harvard Medical School:
URL Exhibit 1:
URL Exhibit 2:
URL Exhibit 3:
URL Exhibit 4: Excellent Imagery on bacterial populations and common descent: https://goo.gl/images/nBT2CL
URL Exhibit 5: