Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Vestigial Organs?
Flatland
Junior Member (Idle past 4446 days)
Posts: 10
Joined: 01-30-2010


Message 10 of 109 (554495)
04-08-2010 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Faith
04-08-2010 12:06 PM


quote:
I'm a creationist and I disagree with the creationists who think vestigial organs have a purpose. I think they once had a purpose but lost it. I wish we creationists could all get on the same page but right now it isn't happening.
Some creationists focus exclusively on the Creation or design and ignore the Fall, which leads them to postulate functions for disease processes although the Fall is quite sufficient for an explanation of them. My impression is that these tend to be creationists who find ways to fit evolution into the book of Genesis. In the full Biblical context, the Fall best explains all disease processes, which would include organs that have lost their original function.
Some claim that some function remains, or some other function has been adopted by the organ, and not just some creationists but also some evolutionists are convinced of something along these lines, as Coragyps' post shows.
The same situation applies to junk DNA, or "pseudogenes" or "dead genes" (or was it "dead DNA") as Jerry Coyne calls them in his recent book. Some claim they have some sort of function but not the function of normal genes, while others treat them entirely as the corpses of previously functioning genes.
In the theory of evolution dead DNA is interpreted as representing formerly useful functions no longer needed by the newer adaptations.
Here too some creationists look for function because of their exclusive focus on a perfect creation of viable designs; but to a YEC creationist who takes the Fall into account the most reasonable hypothesis is that they are a record at the genetic level of all the death and disease brought about because of the Fall.
Apparently there's some evidence on both sides -- no function, some function -- of the claims for both vestigial organs and junk DNA.
There's really nothing here for me to debate, I just wanted to make the distinctions between creationist views of this.
Now can "the fall" explain the increase of human knowledge, the advancement of science and technology, the Renaissance, and the modern world? Why are we living so much better than our ancestors? According to the fall we should be getting worse. More epic fail from our resident creationist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Faith, posted 04-08-2010 12:06 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Faith, posted 04-08-2010 3:19 PM Flatland has replied
 Message 20 by Flyer75, posted 04-08-2010 10:31 PM Flatland has not replied

  
Flatland
Junior Member (Idle past 4446 days)
Posts: 10
Joined: 01-30-2010


Message 22 of 109 (554565)
04-09-2010 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Faith
04-08-2010 3:19 PM


quote:
Huh?
I said it explains DISEASE and DEATH, nothing else. The thread is about vestigial organs, not all of human history. Some creationists insist vestigial organs have a function, I see them as having lost former function, which is consistent with the Fall.
You're the one who brought up the "fall" not me. And no it does not explain death and disease at all. Not one bit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Faith, posted 04-08-2010 3:19 PM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024