Self evident by its very nature doesn't require evidence. And it is self evident that "older" doesn't mean "better", it simply means "older" - your supposition is based on subjectivity, because the evidence actually points to "older" actually meaning "corrupted".
Nice straw man. I have not claimed that Paul is referring to "copies". What Paul himself plainly makes evident by 2 Thessalonians 2:2 - that men were not above circulating false writings in his day, and by Colossians 2:17 - that the truth was being corrupted in his day, serves to well establish the possibility that corrupted MSS could have been produced, copied, and dug up as the "oldest" - albeit fraudulent - MSS we have today.
Do you not recognize that "close" is for hand grenades and horseshoes, but what we have here is written testimony of Early Church Fathers referencing verses that are absent from the Alexandrian Text but present in the Textus Receptus, proving that they were deliberately left out of the Alexandrian? verses that appear in the Textus Receptus? You're no different than an evolutionist. When Dr. Mary Schweitzer's critics - who continued to discount her evolutionary timetable-shattering evidence derived from dino bones - were asked, "How much evidence would be necessary to convince you to change your mind?" their answer was, "There will never be enough evidence."
Yes, but the purpose of Hippolytus' reference has to do with refuting Marcion, who Tertullian called out for his notorious use of the knife instead of the pen with regard to the Bible. Even Origen included the verse in his writings, a verse that the Critical Text claims to not be part of Scripture.