mrrzy, as I was saying to dmcg, and your post illustrates the point, what is observable, repeatable testable science, is described as Darwinist rules, but Darwinism asserts [as I assume you do] that microbes to man evolution can be extrapolated from that. the examples you give do not evidence the latter.

Microbes to human doesn't need to be extrapolated, it's in the molecular data. Look at the microbes that *make* people - only about 1 in 100 cells in you are coded for my *your* dna, the rest are one-celled animals that live within your cells and make your tissues work. The tree of life is fairly well established but you have to have a microscope to see us on it, since there are so very few species that are multicellular or big enough for us to see. We are at the very end of a twig at the very end of a tiny branch called Animals-and-Fungi; the rest of the entire tree is branch after branch upon bough after bough of microbes going back to a single trunk.
Here are a bunch of illustrations; this one shows it like a usual tree, but there are plenty of better visual representations like this or this.