Absolutely. The eohippus was dead long before there was a horse. But I'm not talking about the horse nor the eohippus. I am talking about where the Pakicetus fits into the DNA tree. Are you willing to answer the question?
You wrote: Absolutely. The eohippus was dead long before there was a horse. But I'm not talking about the horse nor the eohippus. I am talking about where the Pakicetus fits into the DNA tree. Are you willing to answer the question?
I'm not familiar with Pakicetus, and thus have no opinion on your position on same. But since you make the strong claim that evolution is impossible, any evolution disproves your "theory." You are of course familiar with eohippus.
Yes, I agree that "eohippus was dead long before there was a horse," for the trivial reason that once the animal grew to where it is called the horse it is no longer called eohippus. But the eohippus: 1) got much larger over time in a well-represented series of fossils; and 2)eventually evolved into the horse.
You obviously deny #2 above. Do you also deny #1? (That eohippus grew several-fold?) Or is it that the little eohippi were killed first by the flood?