You're not putting me on the side of the creationists.

As it happens, the 'evolution' of folk song has a lot in common with biological evolution. Specifically, it's a two-stage process: in the case of evolution, random mutations produce variations, and natural selection determines which variations survive to the next generation. In the case of the folk process, individual creativity (plus imperfect recall and happy accidents) produces a multitude of variations - every performance of every song is different in some respect. But the second stage is crucial, just as it is with evolution: it's the adoption of particular variants by listeners, who then go on to base their own versions on a variant they like, that determines which songs go down to the next generation.

So no, it's not true to say that

The Folk Process is simply about individual singers making their own creative choices about what they sing and how they sing it thus creating a cultural fluidity.

Or rather, that's half of it - and that's the half that still happens and always will, for as long as anyone sings anything. It's the other half that's been eroded, almost into nothingness, by recorded and broadcast music.