With 10^93 possible functional cytochrome c functional sequences there are only “three possibilities”? - Hooby
Yes. Can you suggest a fourth one?
You imply that if it’s not “random” sequences or “identical” sequences, then it must be evolution!
No I didn't. I said that the third possibility was that 'DNA sequences vary in a pattern that exactly corresponds to the relationships previously identified by evolution'.
This turned out to be the case. It was the most profound piece of evidence for common ancestry.
Why do Evolutionists like to present the argument in ways that are so favorable to evolution?
There is no such thing as an 'evolutionist'. There are just scientists who accept the evidence for common ancestry and superstitious folk who don't.
Life’s hierarchical pattern was recognized by creationist scientists before modern evolutionary theory.
There is no hierarchy of life. No scientist has thought that way for about a century.
There is also no such thing as a 'creationist scientist'. That is an oxymoron like a single batchelor or a well-read creationist.
The fact that cytochrome c sequences conform to this same pattern does not mean that evolution is the only option
Yes is absolutely does. Your failure to understand the significance of the evidence is irrelevant.