Applying Ocaam's Razor to the Creation/Evolution Discussion

[The Barbarian]

On 2/26/2021 at 12:51 PM, teddyv said:

It took man 195,000 years to discover farming and fire? Man sure is stupid. 

Maybe not.   Until modern times, hunter-gatherers were usually healthier, better-fed, and longer-lived than farmers.   Some anthropologists think farming was a disaster for humans.    It led to famines, inequality, and wars.   We are just finding ways out of those disasters, but we are far from finished with that process.

The problem for humans is that while farmers tended to be less healthy than hunter-gatherers, you can pack a lot more farmers into a given amount of land than can support hunter-gatherers.   So farmers tended to squeeze other people out of their territory.   

[Waggles]

Creation by an uber intelligent mind is evident in good and truthful observation of our plant Earth and life; the solar system, the galaxies, the universe, matter and physics.

The creation is pure mathematics from Fibonacci and the Golden Ratio (roughly 1.618 from atoms to spiral shells to galaxies) to the seal of God; such as ALL bird eggs hatch in multiples of exactly 7 days - 7 -14 - 21 - 28 - 35 - 42 days from the smallest to the largest. 

True science discovers intelligent design and engineering, whilst Darwinist evolution requires suppositions, falsifying evidence; one-eyed interpretation of the observable; false claims about fossils and geological strata; claims about evolution of DNA that many geneticists refute as impossible given the determined arrangements and bonding of DNA.

After 200 years of Darwinism no evolutionist can show me evidence of the evolution of eyes, kidneys, livers, digestive system or the endocrinal system, nor the brain. All you get is artist illustrations in books of animals that already have all these requirements. And then they have fanciful myths about dinosaurs becoming birds. Really that is on a par with Harry Potter. 

Better still is that I can have a personal relationship with the God of creation and actually become a new creation myself through the indwelling Holy Spirit. And know the truth. 

What can Richard Dawkins offer anybody but spiritual death by believing a lie. 

[Waggles]

Amazing Flagellum : Michael Behe and the Revolution of Intelligent Design - YouTube 

[teddyv]

22 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Maybe not.   Until modern times, hunter-gatherers were usually healthier, better-fed, and longer-lived than farmers.   Some anthropologists think farming was a disaster for humans.    It led to famines, inequality, and wars.   We are just finding ways out of those disasters, but we are far from finished with that process.

The problem for humans is that while farmers tended to be less healthy than hunter-gatherers, you can pack a lot more farmers into a given amount of land than can support hunter-gatherers.   So farmers tended to squeeze other people out of their territory.   

That was not me that wrote that.

[Starise]

Recently I have been wondering why we have so many terms to describe basic human logic processes. I have heard of Occam's Razor. Another way to see similar things.

I sometimes wonder if Occam sported a beard ? If the available data is all wrong, yet we are led to believe it our answer will be simplified based on a dozen other faulty assumptions. A simplified mostly to the point is answer could be ok with Occam's razor yet a bad answer because sometimes people need to be deprogrammed, brought out of the matrix, in order to reboot their thinking.

Many people are convinced of evolutionary theory to the point they will argue non stop over it. The animal kingdom, human anatomy over time and history are all very big pills to swallow when using data only obtained from certain dedicated sources.

Nature should lead us to God since He originated all of it.

[The Barbarian]

5 hours ago, teddyv said:

That was not me that wrote that.

Oops, sorry.

[The Barbarian]

20 hours ago, Waggles said:

After 200 years of Darwinism no evolutionist can show me evidence of the evolution of eyes, kidneys, livers, digestive system or the endocrinal system, nor the brain.

No problem there.  Which would you like me to show you first?

 

[Waggles]

On 3/2/2021 at 6:33 AM, The Barbarian said:

No problem there.  Which would you like me to show you first?

 

Go for it. Show me the evidence, the supposed incremental stages of development of internal organs and their complex interrelationships. 

Show me the development from amoeba to complex creature with a spinal cord and functioning circulatory system.

[Waggles]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpRPTYVi5nY 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Waggles

[The Barbarian]

16 hours ago, Waggles said:

Show me the development from amoeba to complex creature with a spinal cord and functioning circulatory system.

You already lost your way.   Amoebae didn't give rise to multicellular creatures.   They are too evolved in other ways to have done this.  

Dujardin, a French biologist interested in protozoan evolution, recorded the morphological similarities of choanoflagellates and sponge choanocytes and proposed the possibility of a close relationship as early as 1841.^[11] Over the past decade, this hypothesized relationship between choanoflagellates and animals has been upheld by independent analyses of multiple unlinked sequences: 18S rDNA, nuclear protein-coding genes, and mitochondrial genomes (Steenkamp, et al., 2006; Burger, et al., 2003;^[13] Wainright, et al., 1993). Importantly, comparisons of mitochondrial genome sequences from a choanoflagellate and three sponges confirm the placement of choanoflagellates as an outgroup to Metazoa and negate the possibility that choanoflagellates evolved from metazoans (Lavrov, et al., 2005). Finally, recent studies of genes expressed in choanoflagellates have revealed that choanoflagellates synthesize homologues of metazoan cell signaling and adhesion genes.^[30] (King, 2003) Genome sequencing shows that, among living organisms, the choanoflagellates are most closely related to animals.^[8] Because choanoflagellates and metazoans are closely related, comparisons between the two groups promise to provide insights into the biology of their last common ancestor and the earliest events in metazoan evolution. The choanocytes (also known as "collared cells") of sponges (considered among the most basal metazoa) have the same basic structure as choanoflagellates. Collared cells are found in other animal groups, such as ribbon worms,^[31] suggesting this was the morphology of their last common ancestor. The last common ancestor of animals and choanoflagellates was unicellular, perhaps forming simple colonies; in contrast, the last common ancestor of all eumetazoan animals was a multicellular organism, with differentiated tissues, a definite "body plan", and embryonic development (including gastrulation).^[8] The timing of the splitting of these lineages is difficult to constrain, but was probably in the late Precambrian, >600 million years ago.^[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choanoflagellate

So genetic data shows that choanoflagellates are ancestors to primitive metazoans (animals) like sponges and ctenophores.   First step.   Would you like to see the data for the evolution of animals with true tissues from primitive metazoans?    (2nd step)

As you're probably beginning to realize, it's going to be a long trip.  But we'll get there if you hang with me on this.  Ready for the next?

 

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by The Barbarian