Simple evidence for ID

Uhh..to communicate?

Good start.Now who would you communicate with?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It would start with family...my Mother and Dad..Brothers, Sisters..then in school, I would answer questions and talk to my friends...still later, I would be on the computer talking with Orange Orangutans and everyone else!

Soin the beginning of language, you'd talk with those who were physically close to you?Is that correct?

Yes, and by telephone to Grandma.

But when language was originating there was no telephone. In fact, it's likely that there were only small groups or bands widely seperated from any others.In such a situation, why wouldn't you expect a variety of different languages?If you never see anyone except your local group, how would one language be an advantage?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I dunno...when a certain type of dog barks, that bark sounds the same in china as it does in Sweden. Other behaviors are not contingent upon location--except environmental adaptations. Only humans---among all animals--have no "fur"...and have different articulations of expression in different areas of the world.

Actually that isn't true. Animals that show some degree of plasticity in their communication generally show geographic variation. For example, bird species whose song is learned from parents rather than purely instinctual tend to have different regional "dialects".There are lots of examples hereBirds also don't have fur CheersMick

As soon as I typed that, I knew that someone would comment on the "no fur" thing! I should know because I have a pet Nandayu Conure...although her cousins squawk much the same as she does no matter where they live!This message has been edited by Phatboy, 05-15-2005 01:19 PM

As others have told you, that's not quite accurate. For example, one way we identified different whale groups was from their songs. Bird songs vary greatly from area to area.Communications is important. Language is complex. It is a learned action.It's very likely that language as opposed to sounding is one of those things which was invented time after time, in group after group, place after place. In the americas there appear to be at least five different root languages. It's one of the key things that have been used to build a picture of the arrival of different groups to the continents.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

How about this Scientific American article, abstract below.If Humans Were Built to Last; March 2001; by S. Jay Olshansky, Bruce A. Carnes, Robert N. Butler; 6 page(s)"Bulging disks, fragile bones, fractured hips, torn ligaments, varicose veins, cataracts, hearing loss, hernias and hemorrhoids: the list of bodily malfunctions that plague us as we age is long and all too familiar. Why do we fall apart just as we reach what should be the prime of life?The living machines we call our bodies deteriorate because they were not designed for extended operation and because we now push them to function long past their warranty period. The human body is artistically beautiful and worthy of all the wonder and amazement it invokes. But from an engineer's perspective, it is a complex network of bones, muscles, tendons, valves and joints that are directly analogous to the fallible pulleys, pumps, levers and hinges in machines. As we plunge further into our postreproductive years, our joints and other anatomical features that serve us well or cause no problems at younger ages reveal their imperfections. They wear out or otherwise contribute to the health problems that become common in the later years."I think the reasons we haven't evolved better physical bodies and functionality to live longer are at least two fold.We already live well past the age when we have reproduced (if we are going to) and provided parental care.
Natural selection does not act on traits post-reproductive age - there is no fitness gained from any improvements at this pont.Secondly, we are tied into a number of inferior bone arrangements for upright walking, as described in the article, because we evolved originally as quadrupeds, and there are other evolutionary constraints that prevent us from evolving what might be significant funcational 'improvements' given our current way of life.So, if we were 'designed', it certainly wasn't the best design for living as long as most of us are now.

Hi Ben. I think you came on while I was banned. From what I've read of yours you seem to be a no nonsense person and this message is no exception. It appears that you will be a good addition to EvC admin staff. Topic response:
The Biblical creator did answer the above question about mortality in the Genesis account, given that the death sentence came upon Adam with the original sin. In the Garden of Eden stood the tree of life, the fruit of which was to keep Adam and Eve alive so long as they ate it. This's why, according to the account that God forbid Adam to remain in the garden. This same tree of life will be in Heaven according to the prophet John in Revelation someplace in chapter 21. My point here as per topic is that mankind was, according to the Genesis record, intelligently designed to be immortal.The curse of Adam's original sin, according to the record also affected all of creation which then was what would be considered a perfectly designed habitat for both mankind and the animals by a perfect ID creator. You can read about most of this in Genesis 3.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 05-15-2005 10:18 PM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

The designer also learns from his mistakes.

Please, tell me you are not serious about this.

Meaning he should have come up with a better design by now ?