Just to pose a question here, how can we explain the fossil record of neandertals, cro-mangons, and various other homonids throughout time?
The rough chart, like illustrated here: http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/timeline/timeline.html
shows that:
1) Modern humans were not always upon the earth, as in we are relatively new on the scene
2) many species similiar to mankind has existed upon the earth for a couple million years
And the research that has given us this also is very clear that these species came and went, with only a few instances of each variation existing at the same point in time.
This type of research seems to always point to some kind of common ancestor for all types of mammals, even though it is agreed that there are links missing in the chain. We know for a fact that at one point in time we see this type of animal, and farther back we see fossils that are similiar, but different.
We have even seen changes in physical characteristics of mankind in our lifetime, even a hundred years ago man was typically shorter, than we see today. Some races are the product of interbreeding, and studies in genetics can tell us what races they were mixed from.
We see things like the Innuit, who have asian genes in their make-up, yet their isolation for thousands of years has given them unique characteristics.
It`s just that this overwhelming evidence that points to evolution that is so hard to deny. Even that genome project we spoke of pointed to a race of people that don`t exist anymore. Now we have so many different branches of humanity in all our races that it is obvious our environment has an impact on our developement. Somewhere along the way that one race that had the "Mitochondrial Eve" gave us people with broad noses and black skin, asians with their "mongolian fold" around the eyes, pasty white Europeans, high cheekbones, low cheekbones, etc, etc.
It`s pretty hard to just overlook all these indications.