It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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..
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.
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?
Any chance you can prove that its not a divine process?
What makes you believe that God didn't create evolution?
Do you "believe" the body is just meat?
A chemical process.... life is pointless, and should be considered just a fluke?
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
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.
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...
I happen to like "whimsical theories"...
you call it transparent though... Do you believe my intentions are evil by asking a question?
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...
My own ideas concerning divine evolution are drastically different from that of Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Mormons, etc
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.