Yes and no, mostly no. It's about their implications for the figure I posted in 739 and earlier to Aquinasfan. Evolution has a longwinded story--a postdiction, true--about what those long, long periods of stasis at such simple levels were and, conversely, what that rush of innovation came from over the last part. Creationism has, "Who am I to question HIM?" ID has "Second-guessing the nature or intentions of the designer is of course outside the scope of the theory. (Harrumph!)"
You seem now to be word-twisting on my phrase "modern" mitosis, insisting upon your earlier misinterpretation. (Do I remember you word-twisting on another thread when, correcting your use of "he," I told you that Nebullis is a mother?) I have challenged you to think again. Perhaps rethinking is not your strong point.
No.
I asked one thing. What do you mean by it?
And I asked if you could address what you mean by it in terms of molecular biology.
So I will ask again.
What do you mean by "modern mitosis"?
It is not hard for you to answer a simple direct question on something you said.
Perhaps your understanding of the concept of joke and pun are as nebulous as your understanding of biology. (Goodness me, another pun. I hope your brain doesn't go in to sensory overload).