The Nested Hierarchy fiasco
Another fact is that the theory of evolution does NOT predict vertebrates. It does not predict metazoans and it does not predict there would be organisms who could study and ponder the universe.
That vertebrates are observed is meaningless. The debate is about predictions- at least that is what I was discussing.
Just how can one predict a pattern of something that isn't even predicted to exist?
I then posted THE RULES of hierarchy. Zachriel and his ilk just ignore them or twist them.
That the scientists I quote disagree with my overall inference is also irrelevant to the point being discussed. Obviously they are perfectly happy with the fact that nested hierarchy isn't observed through-n-through because they understand it isn't to be expected.
And no Zachriel, I do not need to visit Alan's blog again*. My last visit was two days ago and I am sure the discussion hasn't progressed much beyond grunting and posturing.
BTW Zachriel, humans are eukaryotes. And if one can't make a nested hierarchy out of our alleged single-celled ancestors why would one expect to be able to make one from their descendants? From chaos, order? From the survival of random replicators?
And just so that everyone is clear, the following was Zachriel's position before reality smacked him upside his head:
If life descended from a common ancestor, it would form a nested hierarchy pattern.
*Evolution in action- watching a mob of evolutionitwits "evolve" into a blob of spineless, nadless wonders.