The closer genetic sequences match, the more recently two organisms branched.
There is no evidence supporting it, and all the more evidence supporting the less controversial models of human evolution, based on evolutionary theory.
There is strong evolutionary evidence by people such as Darwin.There is evidence in our biological structures ie: bones and DNA in particular.Although evolution (the theory) is debated there is very strong evidence (look at Darwins books and research)
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The assertion of a lack of evidence does not prove anything, nor does putting the relevant people in the incorrect time frame of reference. History channel is deceptive and anti-Biblical for failing to point out these biases.Short : Possibly true. What does it prove:nothing.
Yes, it does. This development shows an evolutionary advance.
yes. true.
All organisms are related.
True
It considers only traits that are evolutionary innovations and it is a method of evlutionary classification.
A myth is a fabricated story to explain the unknown. A legend is a traditional story commonly believed to be true. History is evidence-based but not necessarily true.
When taxonomists use a phylogenetic approach, they are most concerned with understanding the evolutionary relationships between organisms. This involves analyzing the similarities and differences in their genetic and physical characteristics to determine their common ancestry and overall evolutionary history. The goal is to create a classification system that reflects the true evolutionary relationships among all organisms.
True
Enzymes lower the energy required for a chemical reaction.