Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?

Before we get to that level, if you're unhappy with the fedora you need to try the Stetson. After that I got a couple hundred more styles for you to try.

So many as in what? Two?We got 10,000+- others who say they are wrong.Ever hear of Project Steve

That's grade school. We are talking way beyond that. No wonder you're lost. A grand delusion of actual fact. And we got pictures. With circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one saying what each one was. Yea, Dredge, we know the lineages quite well and with a lot more consensus than you could afford to admit.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Do you have any idea how easy it is to research the real number and get it right the first time? How easy it is to verify your own understanding?Do you have any idea the depth of intellectual laziness you have displayed for us yet again?Do you realize just how dumb that is?Creationists. Religionists. How do you people survive to breed?

And just casually ignore the next sentence. Typical YEC.

quote:

---

Then there is the genetic data, by the dredge-load, that more that very nicely verifies, challenges/changes, and fills in the rest of the gospel according to ToE.

---

Yes, you are.You're a poof majik goddoneit creationist.Old young, makes no difference.Like maroon and burgundy. Both are red regardless of how you split the hairs.You are a YEC.

We should start a new designation. Young/Old Earth Creationist (YOEC).The vocalization of which would come out as yokel.

Your observation that this sequence is short a thousand intermediate fossils is based on what rationale?How long did you expect microevolution to take turning one species into another?You have shown us no reason to doubt either the lineage or the timeline in this sequence. You have only your personal incredulity as an objection.Your incredulity, born of a lack of training and a religious motivation, means nothing here.Got anything else?Anything actually substantive?

I didn't expect you to understand how/why the video relates to UCA.You're a denier, remember? Did you lose your list of the cast in this little play?I added the video to show everyone else in the lurk-o-sphere there is both utility and applied use to the theory. You'll notice that the video was not a response to you.

We already know how macroevolution occurred.The fossil record shows us that microevolution over many thousand generations is macroevolution. The fossils tell us what happened and Genetics tells us the chemistry. That's how.It's all covered in the The Theory of Evolution. You really should learn about it.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

And yet both are documented, tested, verified. Not bad for the impossible.By your definition Science does impossible things more and more these days. It's hard keeping up with all the impossibilities science is uncovering in this universe. That's just a bunch of wishful hogwash.

I'm sure most of the folk out there knew exactly what the subject was and what the video presented. Again, it was not for you.But, you, not knowing what you're talking about, was the very reason it was presented.In this case we kept the video away from you so as to not confuse you. We know how facts and reality confuse you.Don't feel bad, Dredge, we know where your intellectual failures are and we are trying to compensate for them.

Yes, of course, I should have adjusted for your reading comprehension problem.Notice in my message I said "The fossils tell us what happened ..." while in your message you complain "You seemed to have missed the point. ... I talking about what fossils tell us - they tell us WHAT happened...".For anyone with a reading comprehension above 4th grade these two statements are equivalent.Sorry to have confused you yet again. More confusion.Science has determined how life unfolded. You are just too confused by your own blind religious stupidity to acknowledge or understand. And then you get hung up on some gap or other in the fossil record then act like the the rest of the record doesn't exist.Again, the Theory of Evolution with both its fossils and its chemistry, tells us HOW the history of life unfolded.And no, I didn't miss any point. I WAS talking "macro = micro + time" theory and so were you. It's been a side topic in this thread for quite a few messages.You may need to go back and re-read this thread. I think we've reached beyond your intellectual capacity and you need to refresh to catch up ... again.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Are you kidding me?This YEC trope has been around forever. It was an intellectually vacuous argument decades ago and is downright stupid now.You are a YEC. And a rather dumb one at that. OK. But only the mammal one.So first you get a population of amniotes which evolve into the synapsids, and the sauropsids. The synapsids begat the Eupelycosaurs who begat the sphenacodontians who then begat the Sphenacodontids who then begat the Therapsids who finally begat the mammals. And at each begat we're talking millions of years of microevolution with lots of intermediate begats in between each of those.That was easy. Well, you see, Dredge, dog breeders are not looking to breed a non-dog. They want to breed only a specific type of dog with a highly restrictive set of features. So they inbreed closely related animals which restricts the resultant gene pool for that breed leading to deformities. Artificial selection does that.The only time natural selection does that is when some disaster constricts the breeding population to the point that only closely related animals breed which restricts the resultant gene pool for that population leading to deformities. Like today's Cheetahs.Otherwise, natural selection allows breeding across multiple genetically diverse populations leading to even greater genetic diversity.So that's how you get around this fictitious "brick wall" your strawman invented. Easy. It draws from a more diverse gene pool which in turn adds yet more diversity to the gene pool.”Don't think too hard on the thing. It's chemistry and math and you know those are way beyond your capabilities.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Is that what you're looking for? A fuckin breeding program!Disingenuous fool.Hey, but ok, I'll have a few minutes of fun.To evolve amniotes to synapsids/sauropsids nature took millions of colonies of different species of amniotes, put them in a nice wet warm place and let chemistry work its majik. A few million years later the amniotes were still there but had evolved two separate forms.How's that for a breeding program. Like teenagers you leave them alone and they fuck on their own. Don't need no stinkin' program. So what? That doesn't mean what you think it means. We are quite familiar with this inbreeding disaster and how/why it forms. And you don't know dog breeders. No, fool, it does not. Any such fantasy exists only in your tiny little head.And of all my fantasies I don't recall Darwin being in any of them, though I've had some wide-ranging fantasies so I can't say for sure. A streetcar named Desire jumps both ways. Sixty-four is interdependent on the relatedness of motivation, subcultures, and management.Whiskey on the table is paved with good intentions. You make as much sense as the Do Nothing Button.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.