> Although evolution isn't an explanation of how life began, it does introduce some constrictions on what that explanation can include.
> For instance, all life on earth today is descended from a single common ancestor. Plants, animals and humans were not created apart from each other, one at a time.
We know that the iPhone "evolved" from early cell phones via natural selection aka market selection.
We know that the latest cars similarly "evolved" via a process analogous to biological evolution.
We also know that cars and phones don't share a common ancestor - they evolved separately.
We know that one type of bird evolves into another, while on the other side of the planet one type of rodent evolves into another, separately.
How does biological evolution introduce the constraint that there must be a single common ancestor?
I see you have the belief that there may have been a single common ancestor, but I don't see how that's required for evolution to occur.
> Humans are descended from Apes. Without explaining how that process began,
> the evolutionary evidence about this constraint is emphatic and undeniable.
> This flies in the face of one obvious prominent creation myth.
One very narrow interpretation, perhaps, one that few people hold. Most people, I think, realize that the ancient wisdom in Genesis says things happened in this order:
0. There was nothing - the universe was without form.
1. Space (the stars and the heavens)
3. Oceans and land masses
4. Sea life
5. Animals of the land and air
6. Lastly, humans
For hundreds of years, scientists said that was wrong. Today, we know that Genesis has the sequence correct, and has been correct for thousands of years. Yeah, if you assume that the "yom" between land animals and humans was 24 hours, that's not consistent with evolution. That's not the only meaning of yom, though.