It’s the Science.  ​​​​William Ockham was one of the great thinkers of the last millennium. Ockham laid the foundation for all scientific investigation with his work “The theory of knowledge”; a work in logic and clear thinking. His premise became known as Ockham’s razor.

 

“The theory of knowledge” asks “how do we know what we know”, it’s a bit like that adage – you don’t know what you don’t know.  Ockham’s razor says that if there are two explanations for something, the one with the fewest assumptions or ‘work-arounds’ will be correct. If, after applying umpteen work-a-round’s, we still have multiple unexplained riddles, the theory is probably wrong.

 

There are too many fatal problems with evolution to list them all; convergent evolution is but one.

 

The standard theory of evolution teaches that all life can be traced back to a single common ancestor.  It follows that all life must branch away from common points on the tree of life and various traits in different animals lie at the junctions between branches.  This means that after two life-forms have separated, they keep getting more and more different; i.e. they diverge.  What if this wasn't true?

 

Many features within the animal kingdom reoccur in animals so widely separated from each other on the evolutionary tree that they do not have a common origin. In probability theory when something happens twice, we multiple the odds. Statistically, the probability of something evolving in the first place is infinitely small. for it to happen twice we’d multiple ‘impossible’ x impossible’. If it happened three times, we’d multiple once again, giving ‘impossible’ x 'impossible' x ‘impossible’.- or ‘impossible cubed’

 

​

The evolutionist Kevin Kelly had this to say....

 

“Hundreds, or thousands of cases of isolated significant convergent evolution suggest something else at work. Some other force [besides evolution] pushes the self-organisation of evolution towards recurring solutions. A different dynamic besides the lottery of natural selection steers the course of evolution so that it can reach a remote unlikely destination more than once. It is not a supernatural force, but a fundamental dynamic as simple in its core as evolution itself.”

 

The probability of a significant evolutionary change happening in the first place is to all intents and purposes zero.  It is clear Kelly is telling us that the classical theory of evolution doesn’t work as an explanation; and we are all in agreement that we are here.

​

​If we apply Ockham’s razor (and Kevin was doing that), we need to reject evolution as a credible explanation of how we got here. The only other explanation is an act of creation by a being beyond our ability to comprehend; an explanation that Kevin dismisses because he has made a prior decision to dismiss the possibility of Supernatural Creation; which he did without examining the evidence.  He does so even though he knows our existence can't be explained any other way.  In effect Kelly has decided its "fingers-crossed".

​

Kelly knows from the Ockham’s razor principle that he has to find a third explanation, he hasn't found it yet, but because of his commitment to Atheism, which cannot be aligned with God, Kelly is forced to exercise blind faith in some undiscovered alternative yet to be thought up. Meanwhile, he holds onto an explanation by faith that he knows is wrong; this isn't science, its religion.

 

In the meantime, our dinner is getting cold so we’ll leave him to it.