There are at least two different true trees of life

Cladists assert that there is a single true origin of species (ie, a single true tree of life), and search for this hypothetical “true” origin (ie, theory of creation) practically by so-called “parsimony” analysis. This kind of analysis minimizes change in the properties of species on different such hypothetical theories under the criterion that the minimal such hypothetical theory of creation is the true theory. The usage of this particular criterion is legitimated by the scientific criterion of simplicity.

However, the problem with this usage of the scientific criterion of simplicity is that there has to be a single consistent solution among the choices, because otherwise the analysis is an infinite recursion (ie, infinite loop), and in this case there simply isn’t any. There simply isn’t any consistent consistent hypothetical “true” origin of species (ie, theory of creation).

The reason for this, maybe surprising, lack, is that process does not equal pattern. This fact is actually the problem humanity tries to get a grip of by science. The solution of this problem is not, as cladists appear to believe, to deny it (and thus conflate process and pattern), even if this is the most “parsimonious” solution, because it leads into an infinite loop (ie, Russell’s paradox).

Cladists’ assertion that there is a single true origin of species (ie, a single true tree of life) is thus simply wrong. There isn’t. Instead, there are at least two different such true origins of species (ie, true trees of life).