The correct spelling is "amoeba". The answers to your questions depend upon
what you mean by complexity. Biochemically the answer is no, because
amoebae have the same basic biochemistry as any human cell does.
Structurally the answer is yes, because an amoeba is a single cell, whereas
a human being is a metazoan organism. Evolutionarily the answer is no,
because the amoeba is just as highly evolved beyond the last ancestor it
shared with human beings as a human being is, in its own way.
Perhaps if you explain what you mean by complexity I can give you a specific
answer.
Very well put. It is up to Cummins to provide support for his unsupported assertions.
>
>Do you think there's something fundamentally different
>about the limits of change that allow a snowflake to form from water vs.
>allowing amebas to mutate into humans? If so/not, why?
>
This question does not even make sense. What do you mean by "the limits of
change" in this case and why do you believe it has any bearing on this
issue?
And man did not evolve from amoebae; they are the wrong kind of animal to
have been man's one-celled ancestor.
Thanks for taking the time to try to educate Cummins.
Kevin L. O'Brien