No. The bottom line is I've explained it all before. Experiment and observation is in agreement with me that change is sudden , Darwin's assumptions are flawed, and pyramids were built with linear funiculars by individuals who invented agriculture with the "Theory of Change in Species".
Until you demonstrate this sudden change in a way that is incompatible with current theory this is at best a strawman and more likely just absurd.
But whether I'm right or wrong about anything or everything the fact is modern beliefs in science are miraculous and highly misplaced. Science is not supposed to be a belief system. It's one thing to believe in "laws of nature" because such laws are "apparent" to those who practice or learn science but it's entirely different to treat science as an entity that generates truth and understanding. There is no magic until it is shown there is. Even if magic and miracles exist the scientific perspective is to wait for evidence and experimentation to show it. In the meantime we do not jump to conclusions or assume we have answers.
The rest of this is a diatribe against the anti-science that pervades much of the religious subculture and unfortunately has become popular in political circles. It is not science as anyone who is familiar with the subject would claim.
You are arguing against science, not how it is practiced but against a misrepresentation that seems all too common in the general parlance to the point that we have people arguing that if we don't know everything, we don't know anything and conclusions are the final be all and end all.
Ultimately, you are arguing against a modern redefinition that Burtt would have agreed with in his desire to maintain the validity of metaphysics as a serious field of study.
IMHO
And I won't go into disagreements on Egyptology or whether high energy physics has stalled especially since the discovery of the Higg's boson though that the standard model is incomplete is not even questionable.