"Do All Life Forms Fall into a Nested Hierarchy?"
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/06/do_all_life_for096771.html
This article's title is actually kinda misleading, as the article doesn't talk about nested hierarchies at all. What is does talk about is how many fossils exist that do not fit within the "Tree of Life" or "Single Tree" modal of common decent. The "Single Tree" modal is the evolutionary tree drawn in most biology textbooks today, as proposed by Darwin and touted by evolutionists. This modal represents both a nested hierarchy and common decent from a single ancestor. Another option for interpreting the fossil record, and my personal favorite, is the "Forest" or "Garden" modal. This modal describes the creation of baramins, or kinds of creatures, and their speciation over time. It displays multiple nested hierarchies and many trees of common decent.
But this article is really fun. Here's a quote:
"Sahelanthropus tchadensis is widely touted as a human ancestor that lived about 6-7 million years ago, sometime very soon after the supposed split between the human line and the chimp line. But it's rarely mentioned that this specimen doesn't fit into the standard hominin tree at all. Why? Because it has a flat face, a humanlike quality, which shouldn't exist that far back:
""If we accept these as sufficient evidence to classify S. tchadensis as a hominid at the base, or stem, of the modern human clade, then it plays havoc with the tidy model of human origins. Quite simply, a hominid of this age should only just be beginning to show signs of being a hominid. It certainly should not have the face of a hominid less than one-third of its geological ag. Also, if it is accepted as a stem hominid, under the tidy model the principle of parsimony dictates that all creatures with more primitive faces (and that is a very long list) would, perforce, have to be excluded from the ancestry of modern humans."
(Bernard Wood, "Hominid revelations from Chad," Nature, 418 (July 11, 2002):133-35.)""
