Hidden Etymology?

I was just over looking at a blog of Biblical Archaeology and read "Conan". I wondered what "Conan" had to do with Biblical Archaeology. No, it was Chanaan.

What if the Irish and Welsh names Conan / Cynan go back to a memory in the Gomerite tribe of a cousin called Chanaan?/HGL

URL in Blackletters

URL in Blackletters / URL en lettres gothiques : New blog on the kid, Φιλολoγικά/Philologica, Creation vs. Evolution, gm b1 lou, HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS

Can Single Cell Organisms Evolve into Multi-Cellular Ones?

I was early in my carreer as a creationist aware that multicellular organisms mean specialised cells within same body.

Single Cell organisms mean all the cells are the same, and moreoever, it means multiplication by division, whereas many-celled organisms mean that a one cell starts off from two very specalised cells, which come from a body with specialised cells - in other words, sexual reproduction.

Today I learned of yet another unbridgeable gap for Evolutionists to bridge between one-celled [habitually, not just moment after conception, one-celled] ancestors (or supposed such) and Multi-Cellular progeny (or supposed such).

H/T to Shaun Doyle, here I link:

CMI : Serial cell differentiation: intricate system of design
by Shaun Doyle
http://creation.com/serial-cell-differentiation-intricate-system-of-design

Here they could comment, I think (mainly two links, and a linking comment)

CMI : Trilobite technology
Incredible lens engineering in an ‘early’ creature.
by Charles Stammers, Epiphany 2016
http://creation.com/trilobite-technology

Trilobites are mostly found in Cambrian rock which evolutionists claim was laid down hundreds of millions of years ago.

How about: "Rocks where trilobites are found are therefore* called Cambrian and claimed by Evolutionists to be hundreds of millions of years old"?

That is the track which I have pursued in the series starting at:

Creation vs. Evolution : Three Meanings of Chronological Labels
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2013/12/three-meanings-of-chronological-labels.html

However, Charles Stammers made another point, also valid:

It is pointless to talk of ‘natural selection acting over millions of years’ as the cause of this brilliant design. There is no record of indifferently designed lower lenses. More importantly, there is no need for the trilobite to have had a perfect eye, or even any eye at all. Many had no sight, but there is no evidence that they coped any less well.

Go for his article for more of that./HGL

PS: if you wonder why I comment so often on CMI and so little on much other things, it is because CMI has a generally high quality. Kent Hovind, an older favourite, is uneven, but often brilliant, my comments usually on the blog for "comments under video" format as well as "debate [in comments unde videos]" format: Assorted Retorts./HGL

Note:

* Mostly, sometimes other "periods", due to presence of other fossils - Permian, for instance, as "latest".