Example, finding a human in the Cambrian. But this posteriori monstrosity is only proposed as falsification evidence BECAUSE EVOLUTIONISTS KNOW they will not find such examples. But when we find pollen in the Pre-Cambrian, or the massive falsification evidence of every major phyla preserved in the Cambrian, with the cherry on top of no previous gradations from one type of animal to the next, what happens? Instead of heeding logic, ad-hoc explanations are invoked, or paradigms such as punctuated equilibrium or the hard-type hypothesis.
Much of this doesn't mean anything and is indeed written in a language that you have made up, e.g: "the hard-type hypothesis", a phrase which only you have ever used.
Let me try to answer the bits that are written in English.
* We expect to find representatives of the largest divisions of life, such as phyla, early in the geological record because
according to the theory of evolution the largest divisions must be the earliest ones. The theory of evolution is not falsified by the success of its predictions.
* Creationists themselves reject this nonsense about pollen --- see Arthur V. Chadwick, "Precambrian Pollen in the Grand Canyon - A Reexamination," Origins, 8:1, 1981, pp 7-8 (7-12).
* Are you seriously pretending that there are no intermediate forms? Well, good luck with that. But you will find that the theory is not falsified by stuff you've made up in your head.
* Yes, we do know that you won't find any humans in the Cambrian. This is only one of many things that we are right about. You almost seem to be trying to make it sound as though knowing things is a bad thing. It isn't.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
