Hello stu If by "Phylogenetic Tree of Life" you mean the hypothetical "Evolutionary Tree", then may I suggest that you are being a tad bit disingenuous by trumpeting "..tested, verified, proven....." I was speaking of the "guppy", aka Lebistes reticulatus, belonging to the family Poeciliidae............if anyone notices one of them thingys lounging on the river bank with stubby growths keeping it horizontally stable..............give me a call.
Man, what a treasure trove of modern research. Here's another article where they contacted the netherworld and even managed to capture a photo for proof! http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/19-02-2008/104119-nether_world-0 Bravo, for your thorough diligence! Your unbiased journal will send shock-waves into the dense and dimwitted community of outdated American scientists.
Hi Barth My point is Phylogenetic Tree of Life is all those things in part and some in whole. The many Religious Trees of Life are none of those things at all. My point generally is horizontal gene transfer evidence is overwhelmingly compelling, especially so when set beside the sheer guess and associated make-believe of an imaginary God's ability to undertake magical sorcery. Perhaps those alarm call requirements may just as well extend to all living species first being able to return to breathing underwater for you to accept any actual evidence or facts to do with common ancestry natural selection and evolution, before considering rising from your bed of misplaced incredulity. Although Guppies have now confirmed the process of natural selection, a mainstay of evolution, outside the lab and in nature, you seem to think that insignificant until they what, ...develop a use for nike shoes? It's already happened though. So even if they do also eventually do that, they wouldn't be the first and neither would they be called Guppies, Is it really supposed to be some sort of serious argument that because science does not produce every answer for every detail, it makes religion right or something?