According to “ladyren”:
Sure they do [the notion that two very different life forms evolve from a common ancestor]. You just have to trace the trail back far enough.
Because if they did it just once, then the two that resulted would carry the DNA to do it again. And the chances of that happening were billions and billions and billions to one, and since there were nothing but billions and billions and billions of chemical compounds, it was an absolutely [sic] certainty that it would occur here on this planet—billions of years ago.
Time was not a factor—since the universe anywhere had nothing but time, and billions of planets where this could occur. It happened on this planet, it has, did, or will likely occur on others since the universe is loaded with planets with similar chemical arrangements as ours.
So, think big, and often.
But that thinking is not as convincing as the thinking of David Mateer:
We can clearly see around us that the world is full of design, information and diversity—it is a ‘millionaire’ world. Because evolutionists are committed to a naturalistic explanation, they conclude, ‘Isn’t evolution amazing? Look at what it has created!’ Yet common sense and observational science tell us that the very processes in which the evolutionist trusts are going the wrong way—losing information. Thus, it’s a mystery, and many resign themselves to, ‘Well, given enough time, anything is possible.’ This is not a solution, merely a cop-out.
- Ladyren (2009). Do plants and animals have a common ancestor? [response on internet forum]. Yahoo! Answers. Available https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080620144244AAYoq1L. Last accessed 30th May 2015.
- Mateer, D. (2002). Evolution: Bad Economics. Answers in Genesis. Available https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/information-theory/evolution-bad-economics/. Last accessed 30th May 2015.