Evolution, It's only a theory

reply to post by Aermacchi


Yeah, the thought of anything Evolving into something better based upon
it's ancestor is just so ridicules.

Just like Mobile Phones, Cars and Computer Software.
Some people actually think Porche just change the size of Badge and
move to totally different location (1" inch lower) and say it's this years
model. But in reality they actually start with a totally blank sheet of paper
and design everything from scratch. And it's just co-incidence it just looks
like the previous years. The same applies to Mobile Phones and Microsoft.

reply to post by bootsnspurs33

Originally posted by bootsnspurs33
Evolution is nothing more than blind faith,it's THE religion for those without a brain,a fairytale-but instead of a magic wand the new MAGICAL ingredent is TIME, billions & billions of years.Way back in time (or as OTHER science fiction writers put it Long Long ago) apearently something started from nothing & then it exploded & by the most outrageous & impossible of odds one thing lead to another to another to another & life started, all life,Plant animal,Human, it somehow,some impossible & unexplainable way,evolved. All from this single life source.Meet your great,great,great,great,Etc. Grandfather,the Pine tree(or was it a turnip,or a flea.)& that from something out of nothing billions & billions of years ago. A simply foolish piece of fantasy that has been force fed by that most trustable & reliable friend of us all, the Government thru it's public,gov. controlled school system.Go ahead stay a dunce,trust THEM with the single most important weapon & tool in you & your children possession, YOUR BRAIN & what information that brain recieves.Go ahead say it "I TRUST THE GOV." The complete absurdity of evolution theory & the vehemence it is defended with only speak to how truly desperate it's advocates are to rule out the existence of the Creator.

Oh, wonderful. Someone who didn't even look into evolution (at least that's the impression I'm getting from your post) calling the evolutionists stupid.

As for ancestors and how it's all absurd, there are theories that life on this planet was inevitable

There is also DNA. You have DNA, I have DNA, my dog in the living room has DNA, the plants in my garden have DNA, and the bacteria and some viruses that both cause disease and act symbiotically all have DNA. Before DNA there was RNA, which evolved into DNA. Though not in all cases, as there are are viruses that have RNA.

However, all life on this planet shares DNA. You share DNA with the plants outside, the wolves, the bacteria, the fungi. We are all apart of the same family. Why is this considered so disgusting? I think it's both wonderful and awe-inspiring to know that all known life is, on some level, interconnected.

Of course, that's just my opinion. Saying that some all-seeing, all-knowing, supposedly all-caring Creator plonked everything down, said 'Good Job' and then walked off never to be seen again frankly takes all the wonder out of the equation.

I grew up a Christian, then I learned about evolution, and it fills in all the gaps far more satisfactorily than Creationism ever did.

On the other hand I'm not saying there is no Creator at all, there's definitely a something out there. Just not as rigid and man-like as I get the impression a lot of people want other people to think it is.

I have questions for the ID and Creationist crowd.

1: Why do humans have appendixes, when they are completely useless and cause more harm than anything? Surely an Intelligent Designer would have removed this?

2: Why do humans have tailbones, when humanity has no tails? Again, a useless structure.

3: Why when our air passages meet with our oesophagus, is it on backwards, making us unable to eat and breathe at the same time, and making us vulnerable to choking? Wouldn't it have been more intelligent to make and keep them separate?

Originally posted by skeptic_al
reply to post by Aermacchi

 

Yeah, the thought of anything Evolving into something better based upon
it's ancestor is just so ridicules.

Just like Mobile Phones, Cars and Computer Software.
Some people actually think Porche just change the size of Badge and
move to totally different location (1" inch lower) and say it's this years
model. But in reality they actually start with a totally blank sheet of paper
and design everything from scratch. And it's just co-incidence it just looks
like the previous years. The same applies to Mobile Phones and Microsoft.

I design software for a living. We never start from scratch, the costs would be staggering.

Also, this can't be compared to evolution, unless you're talking AI which can only evolve after we input the parameters (we are the creator).

reply to post by B.A.C.


Thanks for posting portions of that page I linked to. I don't know how to do that. HTML is not an area I am very familiar with.

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf
reply to post by bootsnspurs33

 

Originally posted by bootsnspurs33
Evolution is nothing more than blind faith,it's THE religion for those without a brain,a fairytale-but instead of a magic wand the new MAGICAL ingredent is TIME, billions & billions of years.Way back in time (or as OTHER science fiction writers put it Long Long ago) apearently something started from nothing & then it exploded & by the most outrageous & impossible of odds one thing lead to another to another to another & life started, all life,Plant animal,Human, it somehow,some impossible & unexplainable way,evolved. All from this single life source.Meet your great,great,great,great,Etc. Grandfather,the Pine tree(or was it a turnip,or a flea.)& that from something out of nothing billions & billions of years ago. A simply foolish piece of fantasy that has been force fed by that most trustable & reliable friend of us all, the Government thru it's public,gov. controlled school system.Go ahead stay a dunce,trust THEM with the single most important weapon & tool in you & your children possession, YOUR BRAIN & what information that brain recieves.Go ahead say it "I TRUST THE GOV." The complete absurdity of evolution theory & the vehemence it is defended with only speak to how truly desperate it's advocates are to rule out the existence of the Creator.

Oh, wonderful. Someone who didn't even look into evolution (at least that's the impression I'm getting from your post) calling the evolutionists stupid.

As for ancestors and how it's all absurd, there are theories that life on this planet was inevitable

There is also DNA. You have DNA, I have DNA, my dog in the living room has DNA, the plants in my garden have DNA, and the bacteria and some viruses that both cause disease and act symbiotically all have DNA. Before DNA there was RNA, which evolved into DNA. Though not in all cases, as there are are viruses that have RNA.

However, all life on this planet shares DNA. You share DNA with the plants outside, the wolves, the bacteria, the fungi. We are all apart of the same family. Why is this considered so disgusting? I think it's both wonderful and awe-inspiring to know that all known life is, on some level, interconnected.

Of course, that's just my opinion. Saying that some all-seeing, all-knowing, supposedly all-caring Creator plonked everything down, said 'Good Job' and then walked off never to be seen again frankly takes all the wonder out of the equation.

I grew up a Christian, then I learned about evolution, and it fills in all the gaps far more satisfactorily than Creationism ever did.

On the other hand I'm not saying there is no Creator at all, there's definitely a something out there. Just not as rigid and man-like as I get the impression a lot of people want other people to think it is.

I have questions for the ID and Creationist crowd.

1: Why do humans have appendixes, when they are completely useless and cause more harm than anything? Surely an Intelligent Designer would have removed this?

2: Why do humans have tailbones, when humanity has no tails? Again, a useless structure.

3: Why when our air passages meet with our oesophagus, is it on backwards, making us unable to eat and breathe at the same time, and making us vulnerable to choking? Wouldn't it have been more intelligent to make and keep them separate?

Here you go:


Function of the Appendix:

en.wikipedia.org...
Loren G. Martin, a professor of physiology at Oklahoma State University, argues that the appendix has a function in fetuses and adults.[5] Endocrine cells have been found in the appendix of 11 week old fetuses that contribute to "biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms." In adults, Martin argues that the appendix acts as a lymphatic organ. The appendix is experimentally verified as being rich in infection-fighting lymphoid cells, suggesting that it might play a role in the immune system.

Function of the Tailbone:

en.wikipedia.org...
it is an important attachment for various muscles, tendons and ligaments — which makes it necessary for physicians and patients to pay special attention to these attachments when considering surgical removal of the coccyx.[1] Additionally, it is also part of the weight-bearing tripod structure which act as a support for a sitting person. When a person sits leaning forward, the ischial tuberosities and inferior rami of the ischium take most of the weight, but as the sitting person leans backward, more weight is transferred to the coccyx.[1]

The anterior side of the coccyx serves for the attachment of a group of muscles important for many functions of the pelvic floor (i.e. defecation, continence, etc): The levator ani muscle, which include coccygeus, iliococcygeus, and pubococcygeus. Through the anococcygeal raphé, the coccyx supports the position of the anus. Attached to the posterior side is gluteus maximus which extend the thigh during ambulation.[1]

Many important ligaments attach to the coccyx: The anterior and posterior sacrococcygeal ligaments are the continuations of the anterior and posterior longitudinal ligaments that stretches along the entire spine.[1] Additionally, the lateral sacrococcygeal ligaments complete the foramina for the last sacral nerve.[4] And, lastly, some fibers of the sacrospinous and sacrotuberous ligaments (arising from the spine of the ischium and the ischial tuberosity respectively) also attach to the coccyx.[1]

Do some research would ya?

You can't eat and breathe at the same time? Funny, I can.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by B.A.C.]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by B.A.C.]

Originally posted by jfj123
Can you find a source that isn't the christian answers page?

Are you an anti christian bigot? Or just prejudice against anything published or said by someone who is Christian?

What difference does it make, just take it at face value. It's either reasonable to you or it isn't. I find the calculation and reasons behind them to be quite reasonable. I would feel the same way if an evolutionist website stated those things.

Originally posted by John Matrix
reply to post by B.A.C.

 

Thanks for posting portions of that page I linked to. I don't know how to do that. HTML is not an area I am very familiar with.

No problem, I also bookmarked it, some interesting stuff on there.

Thanks!

reply to post by B.A.C.


Well, thanks for answering that at least. Consider me a little more educated on human biology . (I'll be honest and say I know more about animal biology than I do people )

Btw, apparently it's too late for me to function properly. I meant to say 'swallow' not eat. Which is impossible because of the epiglottis and because they are backwards.

So, would you be so kind as to answer what the function of having an oesophagus joined up with the windpipe (backwards) is?



[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf
reply to post by B.A.C.

 

Well, thanks for answering that at least. Consider me a little more educated on human biology

Btw, apparently it's too late for me to function properly. I meant to say 'swallow' not eat. Which is impossible because of the epiglottis and because they are backwards.

So, would you be so kind as to answer what the function of having an oesophagus joined up with the windpipe (backwards) is?



[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

I honestly can't argue that without just giving my own thoughts on the matter (the amount of muscle required for a 2nd tube would hamper movement, and actually make us MORE prone to choking), but I can say why didn't we evolve a better system?

Heck, why have skin and not an impermeable membrane surrounding us?

reply to post by jfj123
I'll be glad to explain the boat for you,You explain how the big bang complies with the 1st law of thermodynamics. YOU CAN'T!! Also if the universe is 15 billion years old,how long did it take after the bang for life to start,how many times did random evolution & it's trial & error methodology take before it stumbled upon the right enviorns & sequences for a single cell of life to start? Do you understand the mathmetics required in this,do you know what the roch limit is for this equation?The physics of this universe state that it would take 10 to 17th power number of attempts.What was the duration of ea. attempt? At a 1 second duration, 15 billion years isn't a fraction of the time required. Do you have any idea how complex a "simple single DNA molecule" is, The switching mechanism alone in that molecule that allows it to repair,waste disposal,replication & it's ability to alter & vary it's replication, to know what,where,when,& how to vary & alter.That single molecule is like a microscopic factory with 10 to the 80th power of moving parts.Do you understand these numbers because physicist do & they have always been aware of them,their common statement is "if the math doesn't add up we'll change the math,the alternative is a belief in a Creator and that we will not accept!" So go ahead & keep believing that dogma that you were taught in school by the same government that you warn us in other threads not to trust.But first EXPLAIN HOW THE THEORY OF THE BIG BANG COMPLIES WITH THE 1st LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS,BECAUSE I CAN EXPLAIN THE BOAT.

Originally posted by B.A.C.

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf
reply to post by B.A.C.

 

Well, thanks for answering that at least. Consider me a little more educated on human biology

Btw, apparently it's too late for me to function properly. I meant to say 'swallow' not eat. Which is impossible because of the epiglottis and because they are backwards.

So, would you be so kind as to answer what the function of having an oesophagus joined up with the windpipe (backwards) is?



[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

I honestly can't argue that without just giving my own thoughts on the matter (the amount of muscle required for a 2nd tube would hamper movement, and actually make us MORE prone to choking), but I can say why didn't we evolve a better system?

Heck, why have skin and not an impermeable membrane surrounding us?

Evolution would say we didn't evolve a better system because the one we have works adequately enough, and evolution cannot go back and correct it's mistakes, so it works around what it already has. The same reason why intercourse is pleasurable, but birth is a horribly painful and difficult process. Once intercourse is achieved, there will be offspring, so the pressures that drive evolution meant there was no pressure to make the births pleasurable as well.

Because it interfaces with the environment, skin plays a very important role in protecting (the body) against pathogens. Its other functions are insulation, temperature regulation, sensation, synthesis of vitamin D, and the protection of vitamin B folates...

1. Protection: an anatomical barrier from pathogens and damage between the internal and external environment in bodily defense; Langerhans cells in the skin are part of the adaptive immune system.
2. Sensation: contains a variety of nerve endings that react to heat and cold, touch, pressure, vibration, and tissue injury; see somatosensory system and haptics.
3. Heat regulation: the skin contains a blood supply far greater than its requirements which allows precise control of energy loss by radiation, convection and conduction. Dilated blood vessels increase perfusion and heat loss while constricted vessels greatly reduce cutaneous blood flow and conserve heat. Erector pili muscles are significant in animals.
4. Control of evaporation: the skin provides a relatively dry and impermeable barrier to fluid loss. Loss of this function contributes to the massive fluid loss in burns.
5. Aesthetics and communication: others see our skin and can assess our mood, physical state and attractiveness.
6. Storage and synthesis: acts as a storage center for lipids and water, as well as a means of synthesis of vitamin D by action of UV on certain parts of the skin.
7. Excretion: sweat contains urea, however its concentration is 1/130th that of urine, hence excretion by sweating is at most a secondary function to temperature regulation.
8. Absorption: Oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide can diffuse into the epidermis in small amounts, some animals using their skin for their sole respiration organ. In addition, medicine can be administered through the skin, by ointments or by means of adhesive patch, such as the nicotine patch or iontophoresis. The skin is an important site of transport in many other organisms.
9. Water resistance: The skin acts as a water resistant barrier so essential nutrients aren't washed out of the body.

From the Wiki on skin

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

Originally posted by B.A.C.

Originally posted by skeptic_al
reply to post by Aermacchi

 

Yeah, the thought of anything Evolving into something better based upon
it's ancestor is just so ridicules.

Just like Mobile Phones, Cars and Computer Software.
Some people actually think Porche just change the size of Badge and
move to totally different location (1" inch lower) and say it's this years
model. But in reality they actually start with a totally blank sheet of paper
and design everything from scratch. And it's just co-incidence it just looks
like the previous years. The same applies to Mobile Phones and Microsoft.

I design software for a living. We never start from scratch, the costs would be staggering.

Also, this can't be compared to evolution, unless you're talking AI which can only evolve after we input the parameters (we are the creator).

Exactly, it is so much to easier to take something that already exists and
just change or add a few bits. And this is what Nature does in all things
biological.

Originally posted by John Matrix
Originally posted by jfj123
Can you find a source that isn't the christian answers page?

Are you an anti christian bigot? Or just prejudice against anything published or said by someone who is Christian?

You really like throwing that bigot word around don't you?
In actuality the reason I asked that was that from what I've seen, SOME religious individuals have an agenda to hide the truth of evolution.
By the way, I'm christian. Maybe you're the one who's not tolerant of others????

What difference does it make, just take it at face value.

Why would I do that, you don't take my statements at face value or the scientific data that supports evolution.

It's either reasonable to you or it isn't. I find the calculation and reasons behind them to be quite reasonable. I would feel the same way if an evolutionist website stated those things.

Sure you would

Originally posted by bootsnspurs33
reply to post by jfj123

 

I'll be glad to explain the boat for you,You explain how the big bang complies with the 1st law of thermodynamics. YOU CAN'T!!

The big bang has nothing to do with evolution.

Also if the universe is 15 billion years old,how long did it take after the bang for life to start,how many times did random evolution & it's trial & error methodology take before it stumbled upon the right enviorns & sequences for a single cell of life to start?

Depends where you're talking about.

Do you understand the mathmetics required in this,do you know what the roch limit is for this equation?

Since you're inferring you do, explain it to me

The physics of this universe state that it would take 10 to 17th power number of attempts.

Where's your source?

So go ahead & keep believing that dogma that you were taught in school by the same government that you warn us in other threads not to trust.But first EXPLAIN HOW THE THEORY OF THE BIG BANG COMPLIES WITH THE 1st LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS,BECAUSE I CAN EXPLAIN THE BOAT.

Again, the big bang has nothing to do with evolution You're once again inferring you're educated so you obviously know this right?

In any case,

the first law of thermodynamics is an expression of the more universal physical law of the conservation of energy. Succinctly, the first law of thermodynamics states:
"Energy can be transformed (changed from one form to another), but it can neither be created nor destroyed."

en.wikipedia.org...

The big bang

The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the initial conditions and subsequent development of the universe supported by the most comprehensive and accurate explanations from current scientific evidence and observation.[1][2] As used by cosmologists, the term Big Bang generally refers to the idea that the universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past, and continues to expand to this day.

Your assumption is that prior to the big bang, there was nothing and then the big bang happened and there was SOMETHING. This is not generally accepted within the scientific community. Currently we do not know what existed or happened prior to the big bang but there are a number of hypothesis'
Here are a few

While the Big Bang model is well established in cosmology, it is likely to be refined in the future. Little is known about the earliest moments of the universe's history. The Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems require the existence of a singularity at the beginning of cosmic time. However, these theorems assume that general relativity is correct, but general relativity must break down before the universe reaches the Planck temperature, and a correct treatment of quantum gravity may avoid the singularity.[48]

Some proposals, each of which entails untested hypotheses, are:

* models including the Hartle-Hawking no-boundary condition in which the whole of space-time is finite; the Big Bang does represent the limit of time, but without the need for a singularity.[49]
* brane cosmology models[50] in which inflation is due to the movement of branes in string theory; the pre-big bang model; the ekpyrotic model, in which the Big Bang is the result of a collision between branes; and the cyclic model, a variant of the ekpyrotic model in which collisions occur periodically.[51][52][53]
* chaotic inflation, in which inflation events start here and there in a random quantum-gravity foam, each leading to a bubble universe expanding from its own big bang.[54][55]

Proposals in the last two categories see the Big Bang as an event in a much larger and older universe, or multiverse, and not the literal beginning.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf

Originally posted by B.A.C.

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf
reply to post by B.A.C.

 

Well, thanks for answering that at least. Consider me a little more educated on human biology

Btw, apparently it's too late for me to function properly. I meant to say 'swallow' not eat. Which is impossible because of the epiglottis and because they are backwards.

So, would you be so kind as to answer what the function of having an oesophagus joined up with the windpipe (backwards) is?



[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

I honestly can't argue that without just giving my own thoughts on the matter (the amount of muscle required for a 2nd tube would hamper movement, and actually make us MORE prone to choking), but I can say why didn't we evolve a better system?

Heck, why have skin and not an impermeable membrane surrounding us?

Evolution would say we didn't evolve a better system because the one we have works adequately enough, and evolution cannot go back and correct it's mistakes, so it works around what it already has. The same reason why intercourse is pleasurable, but birth is a horribly painful and difficult process. Once intercourse is achieved, there will be offspring, so the pressures that drive evolution meant there was no pressure to make the births pleasurable as well.

Because it interfaces with the environment, skin plays a very important role in protecting (the body) against pathogens. Its other functions are insulation, temperature regulation, sensation, synthesis of vitamin D, and the protection of vitamin B folates...

1. Protection: an anatomical barrier from pathogens and damage between the internal and external environment in bodily defense; Langerhans cells in the skin are part of the adaptive immune system.
2. Sensation: contains a variety of nerve endings that react to heat and cold, touch, pressure, vibration, and tissue injury; see somatosensory system and haptics.
3. Heat regulation: the skin contains a blood supply far greater than its requirements which allows precise control of energy loss by radiation, convection and conduction. Dilated blood vessels increase perfusion and heat loss while constricted vessels greatly reduce cutaneous blood flow and conserve heat. Erector pili muscles are significant in animals.
4. Control of evaporation: the skin provides a relatively dry and impermeable barrier to fluid loss. Loss of this function contributes to the massive fluid loss in burns.
5. Aesthetics and communication: others see our skin and can assess our mood, physical state and attractiveness.
6. Storage and synthesis: acts as a storage center for lipids and water, as well as a means of synthesis of vitamin D by action of UV on certain parts of the skin.
7. Excretion: sweat contains urea, however its concentration is 1/130th that of urine, hence excretion by sweating is at most a secondary function to temperature regulation.
8. Absorption: Oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide can diffuse into the epidermis in small amounts, some animals using their skin for their sole respiration organ. In addition, medicine can be administered through the skin, by ointments or by means of adhesive patch, such as the nicotine patch or iontophoresis. The skin is an important site of transport in many other organisms.
9. Water resistance: The skin acts as a water resistant barrier so essential nutrients aren't washed out of the body.

From the Wiki on skin

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

What do you mean the system we have works good enough so evolution didn't change it? Evolutionists claim evolution created the system we have.

Yes, I'm aware of what skin is for, I was using that as an analogy.

Any time the "naturalist zealots" would like to acknowledge my posts it would be excellent!

Only one of my posts have been acknowledged by the "naturalist zealots" and my rebuttal to that one response i received*, has been ignored.

You guys must have "selective reading".

[edit on 3/5/2009 by JPhish]

Originally posted by B.A.C.

What do you mean the system we have works good enough so evolution didn't change it? Evolutionists claim evolution created the system we have.

Yes, I'm aware of what skin is for, I was using that as an analogy

Fair enough about the skin...

Let me see if I can explain... Evolution is driven by random mutations occuring in animals genes that give that animal either an advantage or disadvantage, and which also would either be picked off by being unfit for or thrive by being beneficial to that animal. The epiglottis is one of evolutions solutions for improving the system (which was randomly created and not so randomly selected via natural selection) in soft skinned animals, whereas in tougher skinned animals the windpipe closes down completely when the animal swallows.

Of course neither of these solutions would be necessary if evolution had gotten it 'intelligently right' in the first place and not put the windpipe and oesophagus together in the mouth, so it has worked around it. What we have right now doesn't work as well as it could, but it works, so our species is still around and thriving. I'm sure if humanity survives for long enough we may well see what the next evolution of this system is, if there are pressures to allow the beneficial mutations to take precedence that is.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf

Originally posted by B.A.C.

What do you mean the system we have works good enough so evolution didn't change it? Evolutionists claim evolution created the system we have.

Yes, I'm aware of what skin is for, I was using that as an analogy

Fair enough about the skin...

Let me see if I can explain... Evolution is driven by random mutations occuring in animals genes that give that animal either an advantage or disadvantage, and which also would either be picked off or selected as being unfit for or being beneficial to that animal. The epiglottis is one of evolutions solutions for improving the system in soft skinned animals, whereas in tougher skinned the windpipe closes down completely when the animal swallows.

Of course neither of these solutions would be necessary if evolution had gotten it 'intelligently right' in the first place and not put the windpipe and oesophagus together in the mouth, so it has worked around it. What we have right now doesn't work as well as it could, but it works, so our species is still around and thriving. I'm sure if humanity survives for long enough we may well see what the next evolution of this system is, if there are pressures to allow the beneficial mutations to take precedence that is.

OK but then why the questions about the appendix and tailbone?

There was no need to remove them. "Evolution would say we didn't evolve a better system because the one we have works adequately enough, and evolution cannot go back and correct it's mistakes" Right?

Originally posted by JPhish
Any time the "naturalist zealots" would like to acknowledge my posts it would be excellent!

Only one of my posts have been acknowledged by the "naturalist zealots" and my rebuttal to that one response i did get, has been ignored.

You guys must have "selective reading".

Originally posted by JPhish

ALL THESE PAGES AND NOBODY HAS POSTED ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT CREATIONISM

Who’s advocating creationism? I’m simply opposing arrogant people who claim to know more than they possible can.

Might be because of the statement that you are arguing for the sake of arguing?

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

Originally posted by B.A.C.

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf

Originally posted by B.A.C.

What do you mean the system we have works good enough so evolution didn't change it? Evolutionists claim evolution created the system we have.

Yes, I'm aware of what skin is for, I was using that as an analogy

Fair enough about the skin...

Let me see if I can explain... Evolution is driven by random mutations occuring in animals genes that give that animal either an advantage or disadvantage, and which also would either be picked off or selected as being unfit for or being beneficial to that animal. The epiglottis is one of evolutions solutions for improving the system in soft skinned animals, whereas in tougher skinned the windpipe closes down completely when the animal swallows.

Of course neither of these solutions would be necessary if evolution had gotten it 'intelligently right' in the first place and not put the windpipe and oesophagus together in the mouth, so it has worked around it. What we have right now doesn't work as well as it could, but it works, so our species is still around and thriving. I'm sure if humanity survives for long enough we may well see what the next evolution of this system is, if there are pressures to allow the beneficial mutations to take precedence that is.

OK but then why the questions about the appendix and tailbone?

There was no need to remove them. "Evolution would say we didn't evolve a better system because the one we have works adequately enough, and evolution cannot go back and correct it's mistakes" Right?

You've pretty much just hit my problem with creationism and Intelligent Design on the head. Evolution makes mistakes, whereas an Intelligent Creator of All wouldn't. (It's either that or this Creator has a sick, twisted sense of humour)

Our appendix was used for the digestion of tough plant materials once, but we moved on to other food types that didn't need it, so it got smaller (but as you showed me, still had a useful ability, which is probably why it stayed around). I only knew about the digestion of tough plant materials bit.

The tailbone, is, well, why have a 'tail' bone in the first place with ID? A bone that attests that once our ancestors had tails, but then they became useless so shrank into our bodies. Shouldn't there be a bone, but not necessarily one that resembles a vestigial animal tail, doing the job it is doing now?

I guess the point is, whilst evolution allows for vestigial limbs and organs to show up in living creatures right now, the idea that an Intelligent creator made these organisms would seem to mean that there's no need for vestigial anything.

EDIT to say I'd love to debate more with you but I'm going to go to bed now

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by ShiningSabrewolf]