####micro means "tiny"
microbe means "tiny living thing"####
I think we're all aware of that.
What I'm waiting for from you is a revelation. You've built yourself up as possessing great knowledge of this subject. So much so, that I'm expecting phenomenal things from you. So, drop all the cuteness and pettiness and hit me with what you've got. Demonstrate to me that we're descended from micro-organisms beyond any reasonable doubt. For that matter, demonstrate to me that humans and chimps are descended from a common ancestor beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can do that, demonstrate that God had nothing to do with it.
Remember, I'm not just asking for evidence. I admit there is such evidence. I've never ruled it out as a possibility that we are indeed descended from micro-organisms. If you do nothing but provide me with evidence I'll be forced to consider you a failure since there are alternative explanations for that evidence (e.g., God's design and creation).
Don't forget, I stated at the outset that it's possible that we are indeed the descendents of micro-organisms, but I have doubts. So do others, which is why we object to banning any other possibility from being discussed in the public schools. You jumped in AFTER I had so asserted, as if you had the capacity to take things one step further and clear up those doubts. So go ahead.
Show me why I should totally abandon my doubts and agree with you that micro-to-man evolution is a fact and it's settled for now and all eternity. And while you're at it, demonstrate that God had nothing to do with it.
Honestly, I respect you and your opinion, but you're really off on a tangent here.
if "we are all aware of that" then no one would use "micro" in place of "microbe" ... ever.
if you await a revelation from me, you are bound to be disappointed.
I am no authority on molecular biology or evolution, and certainly have no ground-breaking "proof" tucked up my sleeve.
However, from long experience now, I *am* a bit of an authority on the tactics of imprecision, illogic, and obfuscation used by the anti-evo crowd to muck up the issue.
case in point - you say you don't want "just evidence", yet you request a demonstration "beyond a reasonable doubt". this is a contradiction in terms. Barring corporeal time travel, absolute first-hand demonstration is impossible to pull off, and you know this.
On the other hand, records of past events preserved in DNA are excellent "evidence" which do demonstrate common primate descent beyond a reasonable doubt: the so-called "DNA fossils" of genetic *errors* common to all primates; the set common only to apes (including humans); the set common to chimps, bonobos, and humans exclusively; the set common to humans alone; and sets exclusive to sub-groups or demographics within the overall human population.
This is DNA evidence which would easily stand up in court in a capital murder case, which fits the bill of "beyond reasonable doubt"
I've read biologists refer to these fossil DNA errors as "the smoking gun" of common descent.
but... you don't like mere evidence.
oh, well... what shall a mere mortal do?