Seriously, do you want me to propose ways these could have happened? I actually could, but I will not. It is not important. How about I give you a small piece of concrete evidence, say molecular homology. Now, evolution is the accepted theory because I have credible evidence. Show me yours.
"....Different branches of biology have different theoretical interests and goals
and thus employ the homology concept in a different manner...."
"Homology is what I call an investigative kind concept. An investigative kind is a group of things that are assumed
to belong together because they share a structural feature or mechanisms that generates the characteristic features of the kind...."
"The homology concept is an investigative kind concepts because its historical origin stems
from the fact that biologists perceived and perceive a unity of form among different groups of organisms (Riedl, ’78; Wagner, ’86; Young, ’93; Müller, 2003)."
Apperantly you are trying to make a supposition a fact!
I reiterate: Every "argument" has not been thoroughly rebutted. I will grant you that fact is relative to the individual’s perception of it, and apparently you have obtained a perception based on the religion (theory) of evolution. If you were honest with yourself, you would admit that true science does not support evolution nor Creation. However, it does weigh more towards intelligent design. I would be willing to bet your study of science has been through pro-evolution material.