Hi, Peg.
Peg writes:
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.
I’m not particularly concerned with how you want to view it: anything can be twisted to mean whatever the believer wants to believe it means. I think you need to do more than explain your viewpoint on the issue, because, as of right now, I see nothing, other than your viewpoint, that says what you claim it says.
Think a little more critically: you’ve oversimplified the issue by thinking of it in terms of broad, abstract patterns. Look at the details, the minutiae, for just a minute. Take this, for instance: we can take a mouse, replace one of its genes with the human equivalent of that gene, and it can still function essentially the same way, with no apparent effects on its function. Yet, the human and mouse equivalents of that gene are different from one another.
Why would a designer make a different model of each gene for each organism if those genes are functionally equivalent? Why not reuse the same parts and minimize the inefficiency of the system? Efficiency is one of the most basic tenets of design.
-----
Peg writes:
the vestigial argument is weak because many of them have been discovered to actually have a purpose.
You're still making the same error that has been pointed out already. Function has nothing to do with this debate, no matter how many times you assert it.
Evolution also favors functionality, because non-functional organs and systems are a drain on the organism's resources. So, we don't expect animals to be walking around with unusable limbs and superfluous muscles sprouting all over the place: if such animals were biologically successful, it would be a fairly hard blow against natural selection as an important part of evolution.
The reason we predict
any vestigial structures at all is that the entire process of evolution cannot be perfect, and so, will not totally erase all clues of the genealogical history of an organism or species. So, organisms will sometimes have structures and functions that are essentially superfluous for their biological success.
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.