I find much of the logic here bizarre, to be frank. Bringing up the appeal to authority in regard to Nye and Tyson, for example. Neither of them were giving new, unique opinions on the subject. They were stating the collective consensus of evolutionary biologists going back 150 years. As Adam Koncz states in a separate comment, it’s an evolutionary issue.
The way you’ve framed your argument makes it sound like this is really a very roundabout way of debating creationism versus evolution.