I can't answer that, because I'm not sure exactly what you mean by conscience.  It's a nebulous phrase that has been used in different ways.  Define it for me, and then I can address it. 

It's a lot more logical than being molded from clay and somebody's stinky breath lol.

I cannot agree with that as per what I outlined prior. So we shall agree to disagree.

Alright.  Seems like semantics anyway.

There are no such evolutionary transitions that have ever been observed in the fossil record of the past; and the universal law of entropy seems to make it impossible on any significant scale.

Evolutionists claim that evolution is a scientific fact, but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists. Accordingly, most evolutionists now decline opportunities for scientific debates, preferring instead to make unilateral attacks on creationists.

1) Yes there are evolutionary transitions observed in the fossil record. Scale isn't required. Take a look at the fossil record for Horses, which we have a surprising amount of transitional fossil records for.

2) Just because there may be a few missing links that we haven't discovered yet (Note: Yet) that doesn't justify the existence of God or debunk Evolutionary Theory.

3) It is fact because of the fossil record, observing evolutionary changes in micro-biology and various organisms in real time, in real life. (Which I outlined prior.)

4) Creationist Scientists aren't a thing.
The Bible is not evidence and is scientifically inaccurate. (Case in point: The Bible cannot even be accurate with basic math such as P.I.)

Untill you can prove that all the claims in the Bible are 100% accurate. (Such as proving the existence of a God) creationists will not be taken seriously in any legitimate scientific circles.

The only thing your theology has is faith, which is belief without evidence. Ergo. Impossible to ever be scientific.

that's a slightly less disappointing figure than I expected considering the many possible sources

I can sleep a bit easier knowing the sheep aren't quite as real as perceived

Even if there weren't insurmountable evidence, simple logic dicrates that traits that lead to success and survival would become dominant as those that lack those traits die off faster, before multiplying.

Just look at the endless type of tiny dog breeds that could not survive a day by themselves in the wild. If humans are able to breed this many types of different animals out of one species, why wouldn't the same happen in nature?

Nature simply kills off the ones that can't survive or adapt and the rest will keep evolving further or die out once they are unable to adapt to any changes in the environment.