@Herald,
Quote: I am not claiming exactly that, but the taxonomy is designed for the sake of providing 'fake evidences' for the purposes of the evolution theory and the evolution on its part is absolutely orthogonal to any science & theory, actually it is driving in a parallel universe.
OK, what if there were NO classifications of anything below a, say, phylum level. That would make your Creationist "gap" mentality totally leave the page as any kind of argument that youd wish to make (OOPs, did you forget that youd made it waaay up front?)
Quote: Do you have anything else besides the '30 unique features ...' ?
What do you want? Remember theres only about 10 between men and chimpanzees
Quote: Where will you classify the Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster in your taxonomy
You tell me. Myths and fairy tales are more your networks speed
The only question of the last bunch that sounds like you are even trying to learn something is the one about rotatory proteins. Dextro-rotatoryv levorotatory. Im sorry but this aint my area. Im fist a physical chemist and my experience with chirality goes only to crystallography of rare earth silicates . Chirality of proteins (although I know where youre going) is not my bag sorry, youll need to drag up some more **** rom your ID site that is pushing panspermia by virtue of ONE meteorite's levo rotatory amino acids .