Eugene Koonin and two friends from the NIH went tree-hunting. They examined almost 7,000 genomes of prokaryotes. They found trees all right – a whole forest of them. They even found 102 NUTs (nearly universal trees) in the forest. Unfortunately, it’s not what they wanted to find: a single universal tree of life that Darwin’s theory requires. They had to seriously consider the question: was there a biological big bang?

Isn’t it amazing the lengths the Temple of Darwin will go to avoid scientific fact that evolution can not be responsible for the major jumps in the development of life on earth?

"Temple of Darwin"
Sounds like a goth album

I don't get what you're trying to say, try to explain it a little better and put your source in while you're at it.

Yeah, people who walk around trying to understand things make me sick, too.

Source?

And clearly you didn't listen in science class at school because if you did you would understand the scientific process.

A much more damning condemnation of evolutionism would be scientists' complete lack of an explanation for how your brain works.

Absolutely not. There is a very simple explanation for why we may never be able to understand the brain, but it will likely be viewed as the next great blow to human pride. Our brains are simply not complex enough to ever understand itself. In that sense, we may well be like every other animal on the planet.

@OP
You realize that evolution is not contingent on finding a common ancestor to everything right? I ould give you an experiment right now that would verify all of the findings of scientists. Anyone can carry it out with relatively low expense, and relatively quick results. The theory will need to be modified in the future, but what we understand as evolution now will always be a part of it. Life forms adapting to their environment is one of the most easily proven facts that the theory of evolution is based on.

Source?

as with at least one other thread of his, I doubt one exists

Bingo!

this