Another Evidence of Evolution. Just part of an Overwhelming body of such. One rarely mentioned but very telling. Life can traced to a Continuum, with many creatures, including us, having anatomical vestiges of our evolutionary ancestors. An immaculate 'creation' event wouldn't leave useless organs/etc. 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2 Douglas Theobald, Ph.D. Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges Some of the most renowned Evidence for evolution are the various nonfunctional or rudimentary vestigial characters, both anatomical and molecular, that are found throughout biology. A vestige is defined, independently of evolutionary theory, as a reduced and rudimentary structure compared to the same complex structure in other organisms. Vestigial characters, if functional, perform relatively simple, minor, or inessential functions using structures that were clearly designed for other complex purposes. Though many vestigial organs have no function, complete non-functionality is not a requirement for vestigiality... [.......] Geoffroy was at a loss for why exactly nature "always leaves vestiges of an organ", yet he could not deny his empirical observations. Ten years later, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) identified several vestigial structures in his Zoological Philosophy [.......]...these "Hypocritical" structures profess something that they do Not do—they clearly appear designed for a certain function which they do Not perform. However, Common Descent provides a scientific explanation for these peculiar structures. Existing species have different structures and perform different functions. If all living organisms descended from a common ancestor, then both functions and structures necessarily have been gained and lost in each lineage during macroevolutionary history. Therefore, from Common Descent and the constraint of gradualism, we predict that many organisms should retain vestigial structures as structural remnants of lost functions. Note that the exact evolutionary mechanism which created a vestigial structure is irrelevant as long as the mechanism is a gradual one. Confirmation: There are Many examples of rudimentary and Nonfunctional vestigial characters carried by organisms, and these can very often be explained in terms of evolutionary histories. For example, from independent phylogenetic evidence, snakes are known to be the descendants of four-legged reptiles. Most Pythons (which are legless snakes) carry Vestigial Pelvises hidden beneath their skin.. The Vestigial pelvis in Pythons is Not attached to vertebrae (as is the normal case in most vertebrates), and it simply floats in the abdominal cavity. Some lizards carry rudimentary, Vestigial Legs underneath their skin, undetectable from the outside... Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are blind yet have rudimentary, Vestigial eyes.... [.......] The ancestors of Humans are known to have been Herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as Wisdom Teeth). Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted (Notes). These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death [footnotes] Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals..." Yet another human Vestigial structure is the Coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult. The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system ... Our internal tail is Unnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications)... [.......]
NO Takers, as I thought. Prunepicker only has one Dishonest/Goofy argument against evo, characterizing the similarities/sequences as 'artist renderings, when in fact, skull Sequences don't need those renderings. He simply has no rebuttal, or even excuse for this OP. Inquisitor's postings are off the wall: a declarative sentence or two followed by an upside-down/Huh! 'deduction.' Still waiting Godist guys. `
We have much better. Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Embryology esp comparative embryology helps a great deal. Producing chickens with teeth and a longer tail is interesting. Incredible to think of what DNA is floating around even in Homo Sapiens.
Ontogeny does not always recapitulate phylogeny--that's an old 1930s theory that is incorrect. Claiming old theories are true just gives the creationists more ammunition. Please study the modern evolutionary synthesis more before you post crap like the above. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674639416
The entire post was tongue in cheek which passed right over your head. Please, get a sense of humor before you post more crap like that above. You have no idea of the educational level or experience of most posters so you may consider being a bit more polite with your conversation with them. And don't tell me what to do.
Tongue in cheek is hard to achieve online. You obviously failed at it. Sorry I hurt your feelings, but I hate it when people make statements that are wrong, even if they are supposedly "tongue in cheek."
You didn't hurt my feelings. I think most people would have picked up the unexplained chicken with teeth thing vs vestigial organs as not entirely serious. And while the exact theory of recapitulation proved untenable it is still part of developmental and evolutionary biology and led to the idea of heterochrony and our understanding of genes and their regulation. The parallels were critical. We do have tails and gills along with a two chambered heart as we develop. It's clear there is a relationship with phylogeny and the 'maturation' of the human fetus. You might consider stop trying to score points bashing other posters.
Vestigial organs don't exist. For example the legs on a python are used in mating to get into position.
I gave many examples in the OP, including THREE on humans/us. No answer to those? Another in the OP: "..Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are Blind yet have rudimentary, Vestigial eyes...:^) Additionally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelvic_spur Pelvic spurs are the externally visible portion of the Vestigial Remnants of legs found on each side of the vent in primitive snakes, such as boas and pythons.[1] The Remnants of a pelvis and femur, which have no connection with the spine, simply "float" in the muscle mass.[1] The femur protrudes from the snake's body and is covered by a corneal spur, which resembles a spur or claw.[1] Males' spurs are generally longer and more pointed than females', and are used for clasping and tickling during courtship and mating,[2] as well as combat with other males in some species.[3]" +
I was short on time when I replied to OP. Let me first state that even if there are vestigial organs, that's an example of losing something, not gaining. In order to prove macro evolution to be true, you need to show a organ evolving into existence. As for blind salamanders, while I didn't find anything on the salamander, blind fish are due to a genetic defect, as shown here. http://askjohnmackay.com/blind-cave-fish-albino-weta-proven-examples-of-evolution/ http://www.creationresearch.net/13-fact-file/488-blind-cave-fish http://creation.com/blind-fish-island-immigrants-and-hairy-babies I just addressed this. the spurs on the python serve a purpose, therefore they aren't vestigial.
Huh? This string is a month old. You didn't answer, you just dumped kweationist garbage. Plenty of new ones above Including TODAY'S: Yet MORE evidence of evolution: Trans-species Polymorphisms http://www.politicalforum.com/index...species-polymorphisms.511840/#post-1067855684 Btw, What happened to your Wisdom Teeth? and you cited: Creation.com? creationresearch.net? http://askjohnmackay.com/ ? .
I don't like to leave an argument I'm in without addressing the reply to me. Such as? I think I'm subscribed to that thread and I'll get to it when I can. I still have them. List one of his objections and I'll address it.
This is juvenile last-wording/a trolling one-line garbage 'reply' to mine which had substance. You got nothing but creation.lol (but thx for the bump!)
This one doesn't even understand macro evolution, the very process he claims does not occur. Mammals populate many different classes, orders, families, genus and species. All mammals have hearts and brains, each an organ. Poster Maccabee demands macro evolution cannot be demonstrated unless the original emergence of one of those organs is demonstrated. Yet, macro evolution occurs at the genus and species level among populations of mammals all of whom already have hearts and brains. Accordingly, macro evolution does not necessarily require the emergence of a new organ. Poster Macabbe's demand is nonsensical and demonstrates he doesn't have an understanding of what macro evolution is and what it isn't.
