Claim: All living things evolved from one organism.
As you use this as an argument for balanced treatment of the evidence I'll demolish it for you.
This is a straw man: there is no claim that all living things evolved from one organism. It is a well supported speculation. Claims and speculations are different matters. The speculation could also be described as a prediction of evolution, though not a necessary one.
Before the discovery of DNA and radioisotope dating the speculation was supported by an understanding of the mechanics of evolution, geological superposition and observations of the fossil record.
Survival of the fittest, though not an absolute, tends to drive less able forms into extinction. If there were dozens, thousands or billions of methods of protolife those methods most efficient at gathering and utilizing the limited resources would push out those forms less able. It is not a reach to speculate that by the time protolife became life there wouldn't be a lot of competitors left standing, but it would be a long shot to call it a shoe in.
Superposition is a reliable comparator of relative age: lower layers are older layers. Events that leave a geologic record can be ordered in time.
No anthropoids are found below a certain level. However, primates are. No primates are found below a certain level. However. mammals are. No mammals are found below a certain level. However, chordates are. No chordates are found below a certain level. However, metazoa are. No metazoa are found below a certain level, However eukarya are. No eukarya are found below a certain level. However, prokaryotes are. No prokaryotes are found below a certain level. However, protobionts are. Life seems to become more limited in types as we go back in time.
With the discovery of radioisotope dating we confirmed superposition as if it needed it and extended it with absolute dating. Not only could we say this is older than that, but this is of this age and that is of that age to within a few percent.
With the discovery of DNA there was a good chance that our speculation that life arose form a single original organism could easily have been shown to be wrong. But that didn't happen. Instead, The degree of certainty of the speculation was greatly heightened; almost assured. All life on Earth uses the same DNA or its simpler, near cousin RNA. The hard teased relationships between vitae were confirmed with comparative ease. Some details change, but the big picture stayed the same.
No one is betting the farm that all life came from a single ancestor. Though that has more to do with its not being important enough to pin down yet. Evolution isn't reliant upon its answer, and abiogenesis is not far enough along in its studies to worry about it much. It only stands as a curiosity.
SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!
Why would you ask for the evidence for something that you've not the patients or care to sit through?
I gave no evidence for any of the above. Its all a story. So what is the difference between my story and yours? My story was derived from the observations, and your observations were derived from the story. More then once you've been given the evidence for my story. Scratching a few names off the members list would suffice to tell you by whom. You don't care. You don't listen. As they painstakingly provide demonstrable detail after detail, you're developing worthless 'what ifs' instead.
Here you've told a story. Now supply the evidence for any of it being true. That a coral superficially resembles a wheel is not evidence. Examine it and see if it is a wheel. Then if it's a 3000 year old wheel. That a dark rock superficially resembles burnt rock is not evidence. Examine it and see if it is burnt rock. Then if it's 3000 year old burnt rock. Now that you've done those things you've evidence that wheels were lost and rocks were burned 3,000 year ago. Now work on how and why.
We have the patients and the desire to hear the evidence, Buz.
It is not time to move on. Moving on is why you haven't gotten the last bit right.
You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
™ Version 4.2
