Sir, I made a clear cut argumentation of refutation.
Apparently you're not familiar enough with the creation/evolution debate to see how many arguments you made. Let me see if I can help you some:
Origen writes:
We began to discuss the origin of both whites and Indians in America and agreed that evolutionary dating methods of human migration are nothing more than a priori scheme to promote the theory.
One topic. This would be a scientific topic that could prompt quite a bit of digging into why science says humans arrived in North America at least 13 or 14 thousand years ago, if not more.
You also added that North American Indians are misrepresented as to wha they say about themselves and that human migration theories are just a scheme to promote evolution. This is related to this first topic, but it does make it wider. That's plenty for one thread.
Origen writes:
For example, in the evolution line of thought, humans have been on this earth in one form or another for some 4-millions years. If this were true then America should have already been populated with several million Indians and White people long before the 17th century!!
A 2nd topic, really not related to the first at all, even though you mention Indians and white people. Still science, but this is a 2nd topic (i.e., wouldn't the world be overpopulated if humans have been around 4 million years).
Actually, after deeper analysis, it looks like the rest of your post just argues this second topic. And this looks like a science topic to me. Can you please pick one or the other topic to focus on, whether there's evidence Indians came here more than 12,000 years ago or whether the world ought to be overpopulated if humans have been here 4 million years?
Maybe you could even split it into two posts, and you could start both topics if you want to discuss them both.
™ Version 4.2