Recent studies suggested that network methods should supplant tree building as the basis of genealogical analysis. This proposition is based upon two arguments. First is the observation that bacterial and archaeal lineages experience processes oppositional to bifurcation and hence the representation of the evolutionary process in a tree like structure is illogical. Second is the argument tree building approaches are circular—you ask for a tree and you get one, which pins a verificationist label on tree building that, if correct, should be the end of phylogenetic analysis as we currently know it. In this review, we examine these questions and suggest that rumors of the death of the bacterial tree of life are exaggerated at best.