Science versus religion

[justifier]

"There is no evidence that the fusing of those two chromosones via a mutation is what changed us from apes to humans."
Nobody said it is.

When you posted the video, you typed "Evolution was and is a scientific theory based on facts." just above it. The title of the video is "Genetic Proof of Evolution". At the end of the video, the speaker comments on DNA being "powerful evidence" for common ancestry between humans and other species, apparently referring in particular to the fused chromosones, which are the topic of the video.

But you are right, nobody explicitly said that the fusing is evidence of evolution. Silly me.

I have one question for you, what is this in the video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVqpWTTCNiU

Not sure. Twelve fingers and toes is outside of normal human genetic variation. It is probably a mutation which occurred generations ago and has been passed on. Some mutations are beneficial, most are not. Mutations are errors in gene copying, i.e. they are not inherited, but they can be passed on and inherited by future generations. Mutations are not evolution, they are just errors.

Island genetics, the tendency of small, isolated genetic pools to produce unusual traits, has been observed in many circumstances, including insular dwarfism and the radical changes among certain famous island chains, for example on Komodo. The Galápagos islands are particularly famous for their influence on Charles Darwin. During his five weeks there he heard that Galápagos tortoises could be identified by island, and noticed that Finches differed from one island to another, but it was only nine months later that he reflected that such facts could show that species were changeable. When he returned to England, his speculation on evolution deepened after experts informed him that these were separate species, not just varieties, and famously that other differing Galápagos birds were all species of finches. Though the finches were less important for Darwin, more recent research has shown the birds now known as Darwin's finches to be a classic case of adaptive evolutionary radiation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation

This is just normal natural selection. Natural selection is not evolution, it is merely the supposed mechanism for evolution. It was not even Darwin who first discovered natural selection, though he was the first to give it that name. However, although natural selection is popularly supposed to be the mechanism of evolution, and this is the mechanism Darwin supposed it to be, genetics has shown this not to be the case. Now mutation - errors in gene copying - are the supposed mechanism. Natural selection cannot lead to evolution of newer and more complex organisms because selection can only be performed on an existing genetic variation and it actually reduces genetic variation, it doesn't increase it.

So in isolation, organisms develop "unusual traits" because they are isolated in a different environment to other organisms of the same descent. It is still within the limits of normal genetic variation.

That is what Darwin really discovered in the Galapagos. His reflection "nine months later" that it shows that species are changeable was due to his atheist, uniformitarian bias, which was in place before he left England. It meant no such thing and modern studies of the Galapagos have shown it not to be the case.