" ... evolutionism (sic) is so pliable it can stretch to anything."

Again, pete, you are confusing 'belief' and 'evidence' - a misapprehension that you are determined to labour under. May I remind you of that quote from a recent 'New Scientist' editorial, which I quoted above and which you so studiously ignored:

"The scientific method is based on verifiable evidence, and is thus NOT A BELIEF SYSTEM [my emphasis], despite frequent claims to the contrary."

New evidence may lead to existing models being modified - it happens all the time. Only fanatical religious fundamentalists, like you, are bothered by this. That is because you have convinced yourself, and are determined to believe, that you are in possession of absolute truth. You are also determined to see science as a competing belief system - which it is NOT - see above.What really bugs you and your co-religionists, though, is that science completely undermines your belief system and renders it irrelevant.

Louis Pasteur knew the difference between belief and evidence way back in the 19th century (you're way, way, way behind the times, pete!).

Another quote which you also wilfully ignored:

"Pasteur asserted the preeminence of hypotheses over religious or metaphysical prejudices and always seemed willing to abandon theories that were outdated or useless in practicality. Pasteur often saw religion as a hinderance to scientific progress."