The Power of the New Intelligent Design...

When we find a person on the ground that is covered in blood, that is what we can expect if he was stabbed with a knife. According to your logic, all people that bleed, must have been stabbed by a knife. And you think to prove you wrong, one needs to prove that knife does not cause bleeding.Learn basic logic before doing science, for goodness sakes. It does not matter what evolution theory would produce, according to your primitive mind. Universal common ancestry is not real.

Brainless troll!

I presented a failed prediction of common ancestry. But you labeled it as arbitrary rule. You lost your touch with reality.

Conclusion is, your reasoning is flawed. Thanks for proving that yourself.

And your point is what?

Alright, you tell me your complete line of reasoning, from start to end.Tell me you have more than, common ancestry predicts nested hierarchy, ergo evolution.

I did not make it up. Feel free to prove to me then that spiders branched into two or more orders. Or crocodiles. Or spiders.What exactly have I made up? Has the mammal not branched into more than twenty orders in less time, according to common ancestry?Tell me, which part have I made up? I speak facts. You are trying so hard to deny hard facts.

As expected, your line of reasoning is weak. Fully relying on a useless prediction that is not even a prediction. Ignoring predictions with actual likelihoods that can be estimated.And you dare to assume that I'm the one rejecting all of science.

Have I ever said that it should be completely even? Any other strawmen?It seems now that you are dishonest as well. No surprise there. Evolutionists tend to revert to fallacies when their arguments are completely destroyed.

That is like saying that when more than 20 succesive random lottery draws of a national lottery are won in one city is totally plausible, because of the argument that one city can have different number of winners than another.At what point do you accept that it is not what evolution predicts? It can not be much more extreme than this case. Yet you cling on your theory with terribly bad arguments.

So you think evolution predicts numerous grand branching events in one group and none in noumerous others in similar time frame?Honestly?

You are now offically a broken record, repeating the same strawman over and over again.Another dishonest evolutionist, lying to protect their precious false theory.

The lie that I ever made any claim or suggestion that rate of change needing to be exactly the same. I already explained with examples how extremely skewed the distribution is. Keep dodging, so much dishonesty. Wow!

It's a problem because of probability. I suggest you go back to school and learn math and statistics, before participating in a science forum.

You are tricking yourself by following false theories based on weak logic.