Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?

So this thread is pointless.

Spontaneous generation and the ToE are polar opposites. One could not "rework" one into the other.

The best scientific explanation for fossil record is genetic engineering performed by aliens - this amounts to powerful scientific evidence of the existence of advanced aliens. Since we have scientific evidence for the existence of advanced aliens (ie, the fossil record), it can be assumed that interstellar travel has been achieved. How this was achieved is irrelevant to the validity of my "aliens did it" theory.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Precisely when insects appeared in the fossil record is irrelevant - the point is there is no fossil evidence of any evolutionary ancestors of insects. 1. You criticise me for relying on "the opinions of others", then you supply an opinion from Wiki to back up your own argument! The blatant hypocrisy is hilarious!2. So the opinion of the nobodies at Wiki carries more weight than a world-renown palaeontologist with three insects named after him? More hilarity!Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Why are you conflating a "God" theory and an "aliens" theory? There is no comparison - the former is theology and and the latter is science.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Mr. Occam would call that an "unnecessary enity". It is far from scientific. No more than it points to the existence of scientifically advanced unicorns.

An ad hominem attack is not science. Neither does the belief that all life on earth shares a common ancestor. And this is a criticism? So funny!Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

The Darwinian explanation is very poorly supported by the available fossil evidence, which features huge gaps - gaps that can be best explained by my "aliens did it" theory. Even with band-aid theories like PE, the fossil record should reveal a relatively steady process of evolution - but it often doesn't. Wrong. The mechanism of genetic engineering is not only known and supported, it is observable, repeatable and understood - unlike the nineteenth-century superstition of Darwinian macroevolution, which has never even been observed. Yeah, right . that's why evolutionary theorists like Gerd Muller think the modern synthesis is inadequate and cannot explain the fossil record.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Wow, that's one very tight example of circular reasoning.

That's one possible explanation . but one that can't be tested and confirmed. All things considered the evidence can be
best explained by genetic engineering performed by aliens. Why not?

God of the gaps.Aliens of the gaps.As we learn more the gaps get smaller no matter what you're trying to stuff in them.

Well, you have not presented any science, so I was just describing what you have presented so far. If you encounter someone who believes that, let them know. It wasn't meant as criticism. I have read his papers, have you? You have an odd sense of humor.Edited by Tanypteryx, : No reason given.

That would be a funny thing for an atheist to say - atheism means every living moment, every single thought, deed and emotion is pointless.

Yup. Troll.

Mr. Occan is both right and wrong:"right" because all explanations for the fossil record are "unnecessary"."wrong" because it is necessary to replace the childishly primitive Darwinian explanation with something more in tune with modernity - such as my "aliens did it" theory, the best scientific explanation for the fossil record.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.