Christians & Muslims & Creationists, what is your explanation for Human vestigiality?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 06:30 AM
link   

In the context of human evolution, human vestigiality involves those characters (such as organs or behaviors) occurring in the human species that are considered vestigial—in other words having lost all or most of their original function through evolution. Although structures usually called "vestigial" often appear functionless, a vestigial structure may retain lesser functions or develop minor new ones.[1] In some cases, structures once identified as vestigal simply had an unrecognized function.[2]
The examples of human vestigiality are numerous, including the anatomical (such as the human appendix, tailbone, wisdom teeth, and inside corner of the eye), the behavioral (goose bumps and palmar grasp reflex), sensory (decreased olfaction), and molecular (junk DNA). Many human characteristics are also vestigial in other primates and related animals..


Human Vestigiality


The concept of vestigiality applies to genetically determined structures or attributes that have apparently lost most or all of its ancestral function in a given species. Assessment of the vestigial status must generally rely on comparison with homologous features in related species. The emergence of vestigiality occurs by normal evolutionary processes, typically by loss of function of a feature that is no longer subject to positive selection pressures when it loses its value in a changing environment. More urgently the feature may be selected against when its function becomes definitely harmful. Typical examples of both types occur in the loss of flying capability in island-dwelling species.


Vestigiality


We have various organs which we don't use or we still have a small part of that organ, like our third eye lid, our tail bone, appendix, wisdom teeth, etcetera. Why would God create us with these unused body parts which serve no purpose in our body?

Let me guess,''God made it that way to test to see if you would still believe in him'' or ''the devil created it to decieve you''




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 06:35 AM
link   
I'm agnostic, but I've always wondered why people have such a hard time resolving creationism and evolution.

What if evolution is a god's creative act? In other words....evolution as the process by which a creator creates?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


That is a possibiliy, but I am asking this question to the people who deny evolution and believe God created us like it is said in the Bible or Quran



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Jauk3
 


Vestigiality to me, is just the name given by science to hide the fact that they are the ones who don't know these organs true purposes . I believe these organs actually do serve a purpose in the human body and perhaps, our lack of knowledge about their purpose is the reason why we suffer certain common physical ailments that we would otherwise not suffer if we knew what the organs true purpose was for our human body.

.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
They can't simple as, many still think that because it is called The theory of evolution they believe it is a theory and not fact.
Scientific theory is fact and evolution has been proven in genetics and many other ways.
But no matter what you show them they will say it is still a theory.
I agree with Smylie God may have just put the building blocks in and let it ride, evolution does not disprove god.
I think people can't get a grip with the time scales involved.
I hope a more scientific mind can come and help you here good thread S&F.
edit on 6-1-2013 by boymonkey74 because: bloody dyslexia



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I'm agnostic, but I've always wondered why people have such a hard time resolving creationism and evolution.

What if evolution is a god's creative act? In other words....evolution as the process by which a creator creates?


Because it's a cop out. For god to exist he must be omnipotent and made the world in 6 days.

But that doesn't sit well with people these days, so rather than argue an unwinnable argument they change the rules.

Now it's a case of god hasn't finished yet. Not rested on the 7'th day.

Well it still makes it all a sham.

Religion is fine and dandy. God is groovy and cool. But it's all man made.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


That's a lazy way to reconcile the two, unless you can prove that evolution is a divine process.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Any chance you can prove that its not a divine process?

What makes you believe that God didn't create evolution?




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



Any chance you can prove that its not a divine process?

What makes you believe that God didn't create evolution?


Can you prove it IS a divine process?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


nope... im lazy


Do you "believe" the body is just meat?

A chemical process.... life is pointless, and should be considered just a fluke?




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



Do you "believe" the body is just meat?

A chemical process.... life is pointless, and should be considered just a fluke?


We're not discussing beliefs, we're discussing evidence. You admitted you're unable to prove, at this moment, that evolution is a divine process, so for now, it's just a whimsical theory. It's a transparent attempt to support creationism with science.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I happen to like "whimsical theories"...

you call it transparent though... Do you believe my intentions are evil by asking a question?




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by boymonkey74
They can't simple as, many still think that because it is called The theory of evolution they believe it is a theory and not fact.
Scientific theory is fact and evolution has been proven in genetics and many other ways.
But no matter what you show them they will say it is still a theory.
I agree with Smylie God may have just put the building blocks in and let it ride, evolution does not disprove god.
I think people can't get a grip with the time scales involved.
I hope a more scientific mind can come and help you here good thread S&F.
edit on 6-1-2013 by boymonkey74 because: bloody dyslexia


What Science Is NOT

6. It's not a process that produces certainties, or absolute facts. Science is a process which can only produce "possible" to "highly probable" explanations for natural phenomena; these are never certainties. With new information, tools, or approaches, earlier findings (theories, or even facts) can be replaced by new findings.


12. Scientific Theories are not "tentative ideas" or "hunches". The word "theory" is often used this way in everyday conversation, but a theory in science refers to a highly probable, well-tested comprehensive explanation, usually for a large collection of observations.


What Science IS

Modern science has its limitations:
1. Observations are confined to the biological limits of our senses, even with technological enhancement.
2. The mental processing of our sensory information is unconsciously influenced by previous experiences, which may result in inaccurate or biased perceptions of the world.
3. It is impossible to know if we have observed every possible aspect of a phenomenon, have thought of every possible alternative explanation, or controlled for every possible variable.
4. Scientific knowledge is necessarily contingent knowledge rather than absolute knowledge:
--a. Scientific knowledge is based only on the available evidence which must be assessed and (and is therefore subject to more than one possible interpretation), not on indisputable "proof".
--b. The history of science is filled with numerous examples of scientific knowledge changing over time...
edit on 1/6/2013 by Klassified because: Links
edit on 1/6/2013 by Klassified because: formatting



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



I happen to like "whimsical theories"...

you call it transparent though... Do you believe my intentions are evil by asking a question?


Not at all. Those who use evolution to defend creationism are attempting to bolster their own failure with someone else's success. This is not evil, it's just weak. And as far as I'm aware, you don't exactly adhere to that particular shade of divine evolution. My own ideas concerning divine evolution are drastically different from that of Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Mormons, etc.
edit on 6-1-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Akragon
 



I happen to like "whimsical theories"...

you call it transparent though... Do you believe my intentions are evil by asking a question?


Not at all. Those who use evolution to defend creationism are attempting to bolster their own failure with someone else's success. This is not evil, it's just weak. And as far as I'm aware, you don't exactly adhere to that particular shade of divine evolution. My own ideas concerning divine evolution are drastically different from that of Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Mormons, etc.
edit on 6-1-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Define creationism for me my friend...

I think you're just used to arguing with the Christian community...




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



Define creationism for me my friend...

I think you're just used to arguing with the Christian community...


Haha. You know, I am actively keeping myself from addressing the Christian portion specifically. That's why I used the word "creationism", because it covers all forms of a conscious superpowerful entity planting mankind on earth and controlling the earth ever since.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


You didn't answer my question...

Shall we dance instead?

Like my hat?




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Yes, I did answer your question. I defined my understanding of creationism.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


nope ya didn't...


My own ideas concerning divine evolution are drastically different from that of Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Mormons, etc


Drastically different isn't a definition...


or did you mean this?


That's why I used the word "creationism", because it covers all forms of a conscious superpowerful entity planting mankind on earth and controlling the earth ever since.


edit on 6-1-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


I meant all of it, but that last part specifically was the answer to your question. I thought it was obvious.





new topics
top topics
 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join