It is you who is not awake. The molecular clock is garbage as I have already shown and you have not refuted a single point I made about it. There are several reasons for this the most essential one is that we do not have any examples of half billion year old DNA, 100 million year old DNA or even million year old DNA to make comparisons to. Therefore all the samples we have (with a few exceptions that can be counted on the fingers of one hand) are of current DNA. So how can one tell how far current DNA is from millions of year old DNA if one does not have something to compare it to? The answer is one cannot. The second problem is that SUPPOSEDLY all organisms now living are equally far apart from the first life as all others, so to take one as an example of 'what is older' is totally fallacious. It is using the theory of evolution (how species supposedly descended from each other) to prove how species supposedly descended from each other. This is circular reasoning and utter nonsense. There are more problems with the molecular clock also. Since some creatures have much shorter generations than others, and mutations supposedly occur at each reproduction (how else could they happen!) the 'mutational clock' (for that is what is really being talked about here) should be going at a completely different speed for elephanst than for flys, yet evolutionists moronically claim that it goes at the same speed.
Since you don't understand the science involved, your "refutation" of the mutational clock, in particular, is a hoot. You refute a position that science does not hold, with great fanfare. For the purposes of re-establishing the Tree of Life as Woese did in 2000, the molecular clock is a comparative sorting device, not an actual chronological device. You have wasted a ton of words refuting an irrelevant point.
Now this is one that we have not only discussed to death, but various people have repeatedly given you pointers back to that discussion a number of times. I will not continue this discussion for scratch yet again. Examine Woese's work until you have an inkling of understanding, and then you might be able to offer a relevant argument. This is nothing but another piece of canned hot air I've given you a chance to pull the top off of. I warned you to stop tooling me if you want me to play. You are very close to the limit of my patience at this point.