Replies

And the genes coding for that eye-spot (not true eye, as you keep saying) would be similar to that coding for the eye in other animals.

Okay, let's go with your statement and examine it a bit. Where did Euglena get the eye-spot (it does see light from it). How did the eye of other species descend from Euglena? (and by that I mean through what species).

Note one thing, if there is a match between the eye-spot of the Euglena AND you can find the direct lineage of that trait through other higher species, then you can say that this is proof of evolution. However, if:
1. you cannot find where the Euglena got the eye spot.

OR
2. you cannot find the direct succession of Euglena's eyes to higher species.
OR
3. you cannot show that the gene for the eye-spot in Euglena is the same as those of higher species (this was your statement remember, so you cannot back off from it).
THEN
Euglena is a strong proof against the theory of evolution.

One more time. The one-celled critter and the human being got the coding for the eye from the same place -- a common ancestor. Just because Euglena is one-celled does not mean it has been around since the beginning of life, and simply because it is an animal does not mean it is the forerunner of all other animals. Remember the forks we talked about earlier (probably not, as your memory has proven to be extensively faulty)? You are making simple errors that prove you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when it comes to evolution. You may think you do, but anyone with anything approaching a brain in his head can see right through you.

Ya know...you are so very good at asking multitudes of questions, yet you refuse to answer any posted to you. Why is that so?
And please do not insult my intellegence by saying "waht questions"? There have been scores, if not hundreds of questions asked of you in replies, but you conviently miss them.
Oldcats