Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?

But as we have discussed, they are explicable.Certainly more so by natural means than by your aliens which are not supported by any evidence.

But that wasn't the question was it?You asked: If you want me to answer a different question, you should ask it.Or was this just a typical YEC evasion?

Are Ediacaran fauna algae or bacteria?What do you think you are trying to say?

Except that it makes sense in not relying on some fanciful, unsupported mechanism such as aliens. That's a nice opinion.Would you like to hear some others? Yes, gaps explainable by known aspects of the fossil record.If you had any experience with science, you would understand. But this way, I suppose you are not constrained by facts and you can make up whatever you want. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

He-he-he. None of the above. You really, really have to study even a bit of Biology.

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.

He isn't a YEC, he believes in an old earth. Yes it matters.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Sorry, I don't understand what you are asking here.I will ask again, which novel phyla are you talking about?

I agree, it helps identify the degree of crazy. True YEC is up there with the flat earthers. On the scale of moronic, YEC is the full 10.This guy is also a 10, though for different reasons.

And that does not contradict what the fossils DO tell us.I know you are unaware of this, but science makes no claim to having ALL knowledge. Scientists are adding knowledge all the time.That's why there is science and scientists, because there are still questions to answer.

And they certainly don't refute that evolution is responsible for that progression. Science has moved well beyond Darwinian evolution and I am unaware of anyone bothering to "confirm Darwinian evolution" today. Well, it is not evidence of anything, because insects DO NOT appear out of nowhere.But they DO NOT contradict evolution.

There is a mathematical difference, like the difference between killing one person and two people. But they're both equally wrong, like 2+2=3 and 2+2=5.

IIRC, Dredge has referred several times to the biblical genealogy as some kind of evidence. How does that square with billions of years?

I don't know how he puts it all together, he just seems to believe in an old earth and to some extent in evolution too. If I'm wrong I hope he'll come by and explain his views better.