We have been over this once. There is no evidence for a Q at T(0). Besides, Q appears out of nowhere and has no relationship in the premise (x and y are similar in Z: DO YOU SEE A Q IN THERE?). Period. Denying it doesn't do any good. It's there for all to see.
We have been over this once. There is no evidence for a Q at T(0).
We have been over your denial of the existence of Q (what evolution calls the common ancestor). Do you deny Q physically existed at all or that Q existed but is not a common ancestor? Please clarify.