[sittnick]

Humans continue to evolve and cockroaches continue to evolve.

Says who? The Darwinian approach does not require further evolution. How do you define evolution? Are you saying that a revived 50,000 year old cockroach would not be able to mate and produce fertile offspring with present day cockroach? Do you consider minor variations within a species evolution?

[Alter Kaker]

Are you saying that a revived 50,000 year old cockroach would not be able to mate and produce fertile offspring with present day cockroach?

No, although it's perfectly possible that it wouldn't be able to, depending on the species. Evolution is simply a change in allele frequencies over time, and I'll bet you dollars to donuts that a population of 50kya cockroaches, while morphologically similar, would have a different allele frequency distribution than an extant population. If you looked at a 100kya population, the difference in distributions would be greater. A 2mya cockroach population might still look morpholigically similar, but the difference in alelle frequency distributions would be very high.

[MineralMan]

"Are you saying that a revived 50,000 year old cockroach would not be able to mate and produce fertile offspring with present day cockroach?"

You are, perhaps, not aware that there are numerous species of cockroaches right now on this planet. Most cannot intebreed with other species of cockroaches.

So, there is no "present-day cockroach." There are many different species in the cockroach family. Yet, we call them all cockroaches. Evolution at work.