Tree of life not real (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, February 17, 2014, 15:29 (3934 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Of course innovations are the key to the evolution of new species, and they would probably not survive if they did not work! This does not mean that new species arrive fully developed without precursors, but that existing organisms change their nature (break free from their constraints), whereas others remain as they were. This is a perfectly conventional view of evolution!
> 
> Common descent does not preclude jumps (hence punctuated equilibrium, and the proposal that innovations must work at once if they are to survive). It merely tells us that all living organisms descended from earlier living organisms. The fact that we have not discovered the mechanism does not invalidate the theory, or lend tangible support to theism. We have all seen life descending from earlier life. Has anyone seen life that did not descend from earlier life?-Please read this current review of the 'gaps' and 'jumps' problem. The conventional view of evolution is that no gradualism is ever found! The assumption that life descends from earlier life is what Tony is questioning. We know we get life only from life. There is gradual complexity as we dig though the layers from older to newer. We may have inferred too much from that appearance.-http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/gradualism-the-darwinist-article-of-faith/-These quotes are from folks who have accepted Darwin evolution as approaching the truth.