Evolution: A can of worms

So, are we descended from worms? Evolutionists have recently engaged in a pitched battle over where worms are found in their "tree of life". Another missing link has apparently appeared (or disappeared, depending on your point of view perhaps). A much better explanation is that God created all living creatures during the six days of creation as recorded in Genesis, and that he created them to have certain similarities. After all, how could any group of creatures be completely dissimilar one from another?

(excerpted from Amy Maxmen, “Evolution: A can of worms” Nature 470, 161-162 (2011), cited in "Evolution Running Backwards", Creation-Evolution Headlines, February 2011), also cited in Creation Matters, a publication of Creation Research Society, Volume 16, Number 1, January/February 2011, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2010/CM15%2006%20low%20res.pdf)

A marine worm in the
phylum Acoelomorpha.

 Accoels are tiny worms peppercorn-sized worms found in sea-bottom muck. They represent a crucial stage in animal evolution — the transition some 560 million years ago from simple anemone-like organisms to the zoo of complex creatures that populate the world today.


But a recent report published in Nature is causing scientists to rethink the storyline. It is titled Acoelomorph flatworms are deuterostomes related to Xenoturbella . The study by an international team of researchers, who used new analytical techniques and data, removes acoel worms from their position near the trunk of animal evolution and instead places them closer to vertebrates.

The rearrangement of the tree of life has triggered protests from evolutionary biologists, who are alarmed that they may lose their key example of that crucial intermediate stage of animal evolution.

If acoels do fit within the deuterostomes, the worms must have evolved from an ancestor with a central nervous system, a body cavity and a through-going gut that connected an anus and mouth. So researchers would need to explain how acoels and Xenoturbella lost those and other characteristics. They would also be left to search for another primitive-looking lineage that represents the evolutionary step between jellyfish-like animals and bilaterians. If one even exists.

"I will say, diplomatically, this is the most politically fraught paper I've ever written," says Max Telford, a zoologist at University College London and last author on the paper. "This means that we have no living representative of this stage of evolution: the missing link has gone missing."

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

The Christian religion is very gentle - Identify and utilize its weakness

Myanmar's High Command.

"There shall be no home where the Christian religion is practiced," states the first sentence of the "Program to Destroy the Christian Religion in Burma." The document, created in 2007 and reportedly sanctioned by the government, outlines a 17-point plan to "wipe out" Christians. "The Christian religion is very gentle," states the document. "Identify and utilize its weakness."

Starting in 2009, the government has banned house churches, a popular way of meeting for new Christian converts. In addition, the military junta that rules Burma has targeted the majority Christian Chin, Karen, Naga, Kachin, Shan and Karenni people groups, by destroying Christian schools, hospitals and churches, as well as raping and killing Christians, according to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.

"The government wants this country to be one religion," said a Christian contact in Burma. "If there is a way to stop all kinds of religious activities other than Buddhism, they will. They will always try to stop our work."

(from Voice of the Martyrs, March 2011)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

.JPEG for compression? God's algorithm .BRAIN is far better

How can the brain transmit and process that much visual information? The answer is, apparently, it uses compression – just like computers compress raw camera photos into more manageable JPEG images. That’s the title of an article on Science Daily: “JPEG for the Mind: How the Brain Compresses Visual Information.” \

The .JPEG Compression Algorithm.

“Computers can beat us at math and chess,” said Ed Connor of Johns Hopkins, “but they can’t match our ability to distinguish, recognize, understand, remember, and manipulate the objects that make up our world. “This core human ability depends in part on condensing visual information to a tractable level. For now, at least, the .brain format seems to be the best compression algorithm around.

(excerpted from  "This Is Your Brain on Bytes", Creation-Evolution Headlines, February 2011)

(also published in Creation Matters, a publication of Creation Research Society, Volume 16, Number 1, January/February 2011, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2010/CM15%2006%20low%20res.pdf)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

Tzedakah Ministries

Tzedakah Ministries has a burden to see the Jewish people restored to a righteous covenant relationship with God - one that is only possible through Messiah Jesus.

What is unique about Tzedakah Ministries is that we believe that the best avenue for accomplishing this work is through local Christians and churches. As Franz Delitzsch wrote, "for the church to evangelize the world without thinking of the Jews, is like a bird trying to fly with one broken wing."

Tzedakah Ministries has produced more than a dozen unique evangelist tracts ranging from providing a gospel answer to the Jewish mysticism cult Kabalah to showing how Jesus' Hanuakkh appearance was a pronouncement of both his Messiahship and deity.

For more, see the Tzedakah Ministries website.

(Amy Downey, LCJE Bulletin, Issue 103, February 2011)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

Maybe God used computer models to invent marriage

Callaway's results could be used to suggest that there was an Intelligent Designer who utilized computer models, and determined that monogamous marriage was ideal for the competitive propagation value of homo sapiens.

Summary of  Mathematics and Marriage, by Don DeYoung

(This summary by Marko Malyj is of the article published in Creation Matters, a publication of Creation Research Society, Volume 16, Number 1, January/February 2011, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2011/CM16%2001%20low%20res.pdf.)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

Evolutionary biologists have struggled to explain the origin of monogamous heterosexual marriage. Many of them have concluded that it is a mystery. Some say that evolution favors the widest possible dispersal of a male's genes, and that marriage is an imposed feature of "western society" which conflicts with evolutionary "norms" (Fortunato and Archetti; Barash and Lipton, 2001). This is the kind of "science" that now supports the assault on marriage from homosexuals and others.

Callaway, who is another evolutionary biologist, recently used complex computer models of social behavior to compare the biological multiplication produced within groups practicing monogamous marriage versus groups geared to the wisest possible dispersal of genes [what Christians would call promiscuity! - uMarko]. Callaway determined that

1) Monogamy provides exclusive investment of a couple’s resources in their offspring, giving siblings a competitive advantage over the polygamous alternative. 

2) By giving up multiple wives, men sacrifice their own selfish interests for those of the group.

3) Monogamy tends to prevent men from fighting over women, leading to greater stability in society.

These factors and several others were weighted while the computer model was run over several generations. Callaway concluded that Monogamy and marriage may suit men and women after all. The results gave a solid advantage to monogamy over polygamy for the well being of society.

---

uMarko's 1st postscript: Callaway's computer models did not compare the biological multiplication of homosexual "unions", which is zero. Homosexual unions can only exist as a parasite to Heterosexual unions, otherwise they would have no offspring to process.

2nd postscript: Callaway's results could be used to suggest that there was an Intelligent Designer who utilized computer models, and determined that monogamous marriage was ideal for the competitive propagation value of homo sapiens. However, monogamous marriage is too good (!) and has resulted in "overpopulation" of the planet. Therefore, evolutionary biologists must step in and take corrective action.

3rd postscript: Bible-believing Christians can use Callaway's results to prove that God actually ran sophisticated computer models before deciding to create Eve to be Adam's partner, and then giving them and their children the ordinance of marriage forever, to provide for their well being and for the continued propagation of their children.

Reference

Barash, D.P. and J.E. Lipton. 2001. The Myth of Monogamy. W.H. Freeman, New York.

Callaway, E. 2010. Monogamy and marriage may suit men after all. New Scientist 205 (2742):13.

Fortunato, L. and M. Archetti. 2010. Evolution of monogamous marriage by maximization of inclusive fitness. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 23(1): 149–156.