You seem to be suggesting that there are too many mutations between humans and chimps. Since we are discussing the NBH (nested biological heirarchy) here perhaps you could show how it ties in?
You seem to be simply showing some degree of incredulity regarding the numbers. If you wish to show that the human - chimp transition is not credible perhaps you'd like to open a thread on it.
Your next paragraph is also, apparently, totally off topic as well.
ToE explains that the supplanting of antiquated traits with new and rare traits via natural selection and beneficial mutations as its delivery method; none of which can be verified with any empiricism, because I think we'd all agree that if beneficial mutations exist, they are so rare that they'd be virtually non-existent.
This is also off topic. Please stick to the NBH and then support what you are saying.
So, to you any corresponding genes must then be indicative of ancestry. Sorry, but as i said earlier, out of billions of species, the fact that many would have similarities is obvious
There is no reason for there to be
any similarities for an all powerful God who can build things from dust any way he wants.
It seems from the last paragraphs that you accept the existance of the NBH but conclude that it is a huge coincidence. That is your explanation?
You have yet to say why it is
not support for the idea of one or a few common ancestors. It isn't a final "proof" of course but it is something you have to expect if the idea is correct. You do see that don't you? If not explain why it would NOT appear if the ToE is correct.
™ Version 4.2