"Humans have as much genes in common with chickens and iguanas as chimps"
Wrong
"it doesnt mean a thing to say we have genes in common and claim that as proof of your claims."
Right (at least in the ignorant, throwaway sense that *you* mean these things), but we're not claiming that since we're far more aware than you that evolutionary processes can be difficult to reconstruct unambiguously. Explain what you think the terms "genes" and "in common" mean and perhaps we can have a chat.
i.e. does the (insanely) high level of synteny btwn chimps and humans count as "genes in common" by your definition? Does the maintenance of the same mechanism for translation (despite different transcriptional mechanisms) across every living organism count for anything?
"God created all animals and man"
If you must persist in thinking like that all I can say is "using an evolutionary process"
"so it makes sense we have building blocks in common"
Why is it that whenever God does something that makes sense it's because it obviously *has* to make sense and whenever God does something that *doesn't* make sense that's fine as well?
If you're asserting that God has fiat to defy sense then you're not playing the making-sense game any more. So don't try and join in just when you think you find something that *does* fit the rules. Once you stop playing, you're out. End of.
"and making an excuse for the lack of transitional fossils doesnt mean they ever existed."
Making excuses for the lack of evidence for God and its refusal to submit to any rational test of its presence doesn't mean it ever existed either.
In any case we *do* have quite a few and it's reasonable to point out that every species is and contains a huge number of such things.
"There are no transitional fossils because there were no transitions between kinds"
Define "kind". Go on. C o n s i s t e n t l y.
Sorry, consistency's not *really* your strong suit is it?
