"...how does that prove mud to man evolution?.

Proof is a matter of degree. It indicates that the processes needed DO work as predicted! Science must be able to posit theories and see if the data agrees. So far, data supports their basic theories!

"Mud to man" is not something we can go back and look directly at, but we now know several ways in which that theory can work... it all follows and makes sense. The Galapagos are 6 million years old... there's no way what is there could be there otherwise. As I said, it is just a small laboratory to see the processes working.

The point about it is.... the Earth is NOT just a few 'thousand' years old.

Now... despite at least some evolutionists themselves admitting the glaring deficiencies of the theory!?

That is NOT a common thing.... I don't know ANY serious scientists which 'admit glaring deficiencies'. If there were... so what? You can find someone with supposed credentials willing to say almost anything!

You know, Pete, that you can find 'committed Christians' who say all sorts of things about the supposed 'evidence' of the Bible. In fact, all interpretations of the Bible are largely a word game, arguing about language, translation, relevance...etc! Science demands data... and is willing to reassess details as new data is discovered.
Most creationists are not even willing to look at some ignored manuscripts which others think should BE in the Bible.

So.... it really is a matter of making up one's mind to respect a solid, fair, testable reasonable definition of what counts AS evidence. Otherwise, we can only shrug and talk past each other.