ID guy: Again just because someone can DRAW it to look like a tree does NOT make it so.

Nevertheless, they are topologically equivalent. You can continue to insist otherwise, but it is easily verified.

Ignoring things makes you ignorant…

ID guy: Just because someone can draw it to resemble a tree does not mean it is a tree or topologically resembles a tree.

Zachriel: A phylogenetic tree is topologically equivalent to the branching of an archetypical tree, as anyone can verify for themselves.

Again just because someone can DRAW it to look like a tree does NOT make it so.

You seem to be so obtuse that you can't even understand that simple fact.

ID guy: Just because someone can draw it to resemble a tree does not mean it is a tree or topologically resembles a tree.

A phylogenetic tree is topologically equivalent to the branching of an archetypical tree, as anyone can verify for themselves. Verification is available to anyone willing to look.

Does a family tree also represent a nested hierarchy?

ID guy: The “tree” in phylogenetic tree, is a metaphor.

Zachriel: Yes, it is. But a phylogenetic tree is topologically equivalent to the branching of an archetypical tree, as anyone can verify for themselves.

LoL!!! Just because someone can draw it to resemble a tree does not mean it is a tree or topologically resembles a tree.

ID guy: The “tree” in phylogenetic tree, is a metaphor.

Yes, it is. But a phylogenetic tree is topologically equivalent to the branching of an archetypical tree, as anyone can verify for themselves.

No hierarchy from evolution

Harvard biologist and writer Stephen Jay Gould believes there is no prescribed hierarchy of life; evolution wanders aimlessly, and is as likely to go down as up. Therefore, he has said that the tree of life is a low bush.

Can we have a nested hierarchy when a hierarchy isn't even expected? No.

The network of life

When eukaryotes are included in our considerations of evolution, the phylogeny of life seems better represented by a network than a tree…. — James O. McInerney and Davide Pisani, biologists at the National University of Ireland, commenting on an extensive study of horizontal gene transfer based on microbial genome sequencing that makes use of E. coli.

Are these scientists the crackpots you were talking about?

ID guy: Your claim was about twigs on a tree, not organisms on the alleged tree of life.

Zachriel:Anyone can see that they talk about nested hierarchies and phylogenetic trees. They even provide diagrams that anyone can confirm has the topology of a tree.

Either you are very obtuse or really dishonest.

The “tree” in phylogenetic tree, is a metaphor. And you were supposed to provide a reference that demonstyrates that twigs on a real tree provide a nested hierarchy. You have failed to do so.

ID guy: Mammals and reptiles are on the SAME level.
Zachriel: Mammals and reptiles are both Amniota. The line leading to mammals diverged as Synapsida. (The original Linnaean classification scheme is a bit dated.)

Again with an obtuse response. Both Mammals and Reptiles are on the SAME level in the nested hierarchy of the animal kingdom.

And if you were correct they wouldn’t be. IOW you are wrong.

ID guy: How do YOU know what an intelligent designer would do?

Zachriel: "Intelligent" is a clue. But if you want to propose a specific, testable hypothesis, I'd be happy to consider it.

So you are proud of being obtuse. You said you knew what a designer would do. Now you have failed to back that up. No surprise.

Zachriel: An intelligent Designer will mix and match traits, methods, features from different lineages.

ID guy: How do YOU know what an intelligent designer would do?

ID guy: However it is obvious that with UCD there should be a mixture of traits- they are called transitional forms/ intermediates.
Zachriel: Traits are gradual (first-order) modifications of existing traits. Transitionals are not combinations of features from different extant lineages.

Transitionals would definitely have combinations of features with extant lineasges if all the transitional were still alive. And THAT is the point.

ID guy: Your claim was about twigs on a tree, not organisms on the alleged tree of life.

Anyone can see that they talk about nested hierarchies and phylogenetic trees. They even provide diagrams that anyone can confirm has the topology of a tree.

ID guy: Mammals and reptiles are on the SAME level.

Mammals and reptiles are both Amniota. The line leading to mammals diverged as Synapsida. (The original Linnaean classification scheme is a bit dated.)

ID guy: How do YOU know what an intelligent designer would do?

"Intelligent" is a clue. But if you want to propose a specific, testable hypothesis, I'd be happy to consider it.

Zachriel: An intelligent Designer will mix and match traits, methods, features from different lineages.

ID guy: However it is obvious that with UCD there should be a mixture of traits- they are called transitional forms/ intermediates.

Traits are gradual (first-order) modifications of existing traits. Transitionals are not combinations of features from different extant lineages.