|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4891 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Vestigial Organs? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
CosmicAtheist writes: Could it be that we still have a use for them but not the same use as our ancestors once did? What would be a proper response? the tonsils used to be routinely removed because they were believed to be vestigal. But in more recent years it was discovered that they actually play an important role in the immune system. Just because we dont know what an organs function is, does not mean that it doesnt have a function. Its just that we havnt learnt what it is yet. Anyway, organs of the body are the area of doctors and medical scientists...evolutionists should leave them alone in my opinion. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Fiver writes: The great trick that Creationists pull with regards to vestigial organs is to claim that "vestigial" means "useless". It does not. It means that the organs have lost their original function. can you explain how an organ that has 'lost its original function' is still useful...what do you mean???
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DarkMatter writes: Please explain how the fall explains "disease and death" to me please. imperfection leads to degeneration and death because the body is not as efficient at repairing and regenerating itself. In our perfect state, our bodies would be fully capable of this and thus disease and death would not cause us problems.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DrAdequate writes: What are they supposed to be vestiges of? I have no idea. They are in the list of vestigals though as the the New World Encyclopedia states
new world encyclopedia writes:
It is also argued that over 100 years ago, scientists made claims that certain structures, such as the tonsils, were vestigial, simply because medical science had not advanced to the point where the function of the tonsils could be well understood. Today, the function of the tonsils in disease prevention has been identified.... DrAdequate writes: I don't think we should ignore any evidence. but is it really evidence for evolution??? The original concept was used as an evidence for evolution as my link above shows
In the late nineteenth century, Robert Wiedersheim published a list of 86 human organs that, he claimed, had lost their original function. He then labeled them vestigial, theorizing that they were vestiges of evolution. Since the publication of his list, the true function of some of these structures has been discovered Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection, which used such presumed vestigial structures as the muscles of the ear, wisdom teeth, the appendix, the tail bone, body hair, and the semilunar fold in the corner of the human eye as evidence for his theory. He also made the important distinction in The Origin of Species (1859), that if a structure had lost its primary function, but still retained secondary anatomical roles, it could still be described as vestigial. The fact that vestigial structures reveal a similarity in structure and position with organs in presumed ancestors, but lack the function found in the ancestors, can be considered evidence for evolutionspecifically, the "theory of descent with modification," or "theory of common descent." That is, vestigial organs support the view that all organisms have descended from common ancestors by a continuous process of branching; in other words, all life evolved from one kind of organism or from a few simple kinds Yet as more research went into these organs it was found that many of these 'so-called' vestigial organs were actually still functioning and served useful purposes.....so they go and change the meaning of what a vestigial organ is to mean an organ that can still be used in some minor way to what it was origiinally used for. but hey, its still evidence of evolution! How does that figure??? I thought science was about accepting whatever the evidence shows. guess was wrong.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
hooah212002 writes: Life itself thrives on the imperfection that runs rampant in this universe. what makes you think the universe is imperfect? the earth is the perfect distance from the sun, it is in the perfect angle on its axis to create the 4 seasons and its spinning at the perfect speed... so, in regard to its position in the universe, what aspect of earth is imperfect? I dont believe we 'thrive' on imperfection. People die when they get sick...thats certainly not 'thriving'
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DrAdequate writes: What you need is a scientist stating that they're vestigial, and what they're vestiges of. the list of vestigials that included tonisils was first made by a german anatomist Robert Wiedersheim as that new world encycolopedia article states. I know that was a long time ago, but the point is that he based his data on Darwins ideas and for a very long time the tonsils WERE considered usless because the scientific community accepted it....doctors who were influenced by evolutionary science would routinely remove them. So this is the foundation for the whole idea of vestigial organs...its foundation is very shakey and shakey foundations dont hold much weight behind them. Most of the vestigial organs, in humans especially, have since been proved to be very useful. Why do evolutionists still insist on going down that road???
Dr Adequate writes: Did you not bother to read it absolutely i read it. I left that sentence about Darwin in there because i didnt want to be accused of cherry picking. It was also already mentioned in the thread that the 'real' definition is that they are not completely useful so i'm quite happy to acknowledge that, however that does not make the whole vestigial theory true....it actually makes it worse because it contradicts the idea that these organs are leftovers.
DrAdequate writes: Has it ever occurred to you that if there was really something wrong with the concept of evolution, then people could discredit it without lying about what it is? I agree with you, this is why we see that evolution has been discredited by many people including some scientists themselves. Edited by Peg, : No reason given. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
hooah212002 writes: The simple fact that we are in the right spot peg. We ARE in the right spot for life of our kind to thrive. if things are so imperfect and out of control, how did we just happen to be in the right spot?
hooah212002 writes: Think outside of earth, peg. Read what I wrote. Life needs to die in order for new life to begin. stars are not 'life' they are balls of gasses... no real 'life' has been discovered in the known universe.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
anglagard writes: In Re: siple expanation? (Message 38) you wrote: quote:The Fall gives an explanation for disease and death so where we see disease and death the Fall is the explanation. In Message 52 you wrote: quote:Anyway, organs of the body are the area of doctors and medical scientists...evolutionists should leave them alone in my opinion. Did I? Oh, maybe you should report me...or rate my message Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
bluejay writes: What made it evidence of evolution was the fact that it represented a change: two organisms have the same structure, but with some differences between them, just as evolution predicts to see. I dont see that it is evidence for evolution...i see it more as evidence of the one architect or maker. We are all living organisms and therefore we must have functioning body parts...its not proof of evolution.
blueday writes: But, even the more relaxed version of vestigiality, in which some residual or secondary functionality remains, still represents a commonality in structure between organisms that is best explained by relatedness. see i dont agree that just because birds and dinosaurs and monkeys and humans have a backbone, we must all be related. the vestigial argument is weak because many of them have been discovered to actually have a purpose. Flightless birds such as penguins still use their 'wings' as flippers in the water for instance...to me that is simply a different variety of bird, its not proof of evolution.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
no apology necessary i've done the same thing myself and im sure most others have too...its the nature of forums
But yes you do get wound up and i apologise if my comments get you that way. i'll try to be more tactful and less irritating lol
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
hooah212002 writes: I ask you again: do you know the percentage of the planet that is habitable? Most of the planet is inhabitable...we just choose to stay close to the oceans We could live in the desert, we could live in the mountains (some people do, dont they?) Some live in the antarctic on ice....so the whole planet IS inhabited its just that most of us choose to stay near the water.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DrAdequate writes: And still no-one has found an important function for the tonsils. But the mere fact that the tonsils appear to be useless does not prove that they are vestigial. PROVE TO ME THAT THEY ARE VESTIGIAL. Some creationist babbling out unsubstantiated nonsense does not prove that tonsils are vestigial. PROVE that they are vestigial or shut up. I gave you the name of the man who first listed them among the vestigial. His book was called The Structure of Man: An Index to His Past History' no one is making it up. Perhaps you need to read a bit of the book to see that no one is lying....i've linked it for you. And the page i've linked makes mention of darwins book 'decent of man' as a reference, not to tonsils but to the whole vestigial organ theory that Darwin proposed as evidence for evolution.
DrAdequate writes: And still no-one has found an important function for the tonsils. they play a role in the immune system...its been researched and the medical opinion is that they are a part of the working immune system.I'm not claiming they ARE vestigial. Im pointing out that many of the organs first identified vestiginal, have been proved false....the tonsils being one of them. DrAdequate writes: Couldn't you guys prove your point WITHOUT LYING? if i'm lying, read the book and come back and tell me how i'm lying. i
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DrJones writes: Including the 70% that is the oceans? woops. Correction. I do mean 'earth' or 'land'
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes: Did you even look at your link? You have linked to one page of a review of the book. You have not linked to the book. What you have not done is prove that the tonsils are vestigial. Before I believe that they are, I want proof. im not sure where the link is taking you, i'll check it again to make sure. And im not trying to prove that tonsils are vestigials...my argument is that they are NOT vestigials because modern medics are beginning to understand their function.
DrAdequate writes: And we know that the tonsils play no important role in humans. So the only open question is whether they are vestiges of something that was important ancestrally. they play a role in the immune system...is that system not important? They're composed of lymphoid tissue which are generally located at spots where there may be an entry for pathogens in order to trap them before they enter the body. Thats a fairly important function! I know they are not completely undertsood just yet, but that doesnt mean that they have no purpose.
DrAdequate writes: IF YOU WANT TO PROVE THAT TONSILS ARE VESTIGIAL, THEN PROVE THAT TONSILS ARE VESTIGIAL. you keep saying that but im not trying to prove that they are. Edited by Peg, : No reason given. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Sorry, i did have the wrong link...here is the 'book' link
DrAdequate writes: But would you at least try to prove that someone thinks that they are? On page 2, last paragraph, he explains that organs become vestigial thru 'degeneration' of the organ. On page 164 under the subtitle 'Bursa Pharyngeal' he goes on to say it is a 'degenerative' organ meaning it becomes vestigial. A current medical terminology definition of bursa pharyngeal is: "a cystic notochordal remnant found inconstantly in the posterior wall of the nasopharynx at the lower end of the pharyngeal tonsil."
Its the tonsils. His claim is that it becomes a vestigial which is probably why doctors in the past have routinely removed them. Please show me if i'm wrong, but this is how i'm reading it.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024