Skip to comments.13 Questions Evolution Can Answer, Intelligent Design Cannot
Posted on 02/12/2009 10:24:51 AM PST by steve-b
Stephen Bratteng, a biology teacher at Westwood High School in Austin put this together. I got the list from him when I heard him testify in favor of solid science in biology textbooks, in hearings before the Texas State Board of Education in 2003:
1. Why does giving vitamin and mineral supplements to undernourished anemic individuals cause so many of them to die of bacterial infections?
2. Why did Dr. Heimlich have to develop a maneuver to dislodge food particles from peoples wind pipes?
3. Why does each of your eyes have a blind spot and strong a tendency toward retinal detachment? But a squid whose eyesight is just as sharp does not have these flaws?
4. Why are depression and obesity at epidemic levels in the United States?
5. When Europeans came to the Americas, why did 90 percent of the Native Americans die of European diseases but not many Europeans died of American diseases?
6. Why do pregnant women get morning sickness?
7. Why do people in industrialized countries have a greater tendency to get Crohns disease and asthma?
8. Why does malaria still kill over a million people each year?
9. Why are so many of the product Depends sold each year?
10. Why do people given anti-diarrheal medication take twice as long to recover from dysentery as untreated ones?
11. Why do people of European descent have a fairly high frequency of an allele that can make them resistant to HIV infection?
12. Why do older men often have urinary problems?
13. And why do so many people in Austin get cedar fever?
(Excerpt) Read more at timpanogos.wordpress.com ...
Notice that there is no reasoning in your response. Just the usual empty dogmas. So it’s true, you don’t believe in the existence of factories and engineers.
Evolution is not the study of lifes ultimate origin as a path toward discerning its deepest meaning. Evolution, in fact, is not the study of origins at all. Even the more restricted (and scientifically permissible) question of lifes origin on our earth lies outside its domain Evolution studies the pathways and mechanisms of organic change following the origin of life - Renowned Evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould
I like this quote too:
One could not be a successful scientist without realizing that, in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers and mothers of scientists, a goodly number of scientists are not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid - James Watson, Nobel laureate and co-discoverer of the structure of DNA
Sorry about the spelling errors....
Descartes was sitting in a bar having a drink. The bartender walks up and asks Descartes if he'd like another.
Descartes responds "I think not!", and promptly disappears...
Can you name or list any possible evidence or line of evidence that could rule out ID?
What could rule out the unspecified activity of an unspecified agency having unspecified capabilities, doing unspecified things at unspecified times and places, for unspecified reasons?
I take people at their word. If they represent themselves in thread after thread as a vehement Geocentricist I have no recourse other than to deal with them as a Geocentricist.
I can see why they would be an embarrassment to your side, but it is hard to deny that they exist, and you have no basis for your pretense that they are faking it.
While I've got a little spare time, let's point out another bit of incoherence in evolutionary apologetics. There are plenty of creation articles out there that point out that the human eye is, in fact, well designed, and there are good reasons for the supposed "flaws" that evolutionists ignorantly cite. But those are easy to dig up and I'll not rehash them now.
What's worth pointing out now is that evolutionists try to have it both ways. One the one hand they have that wonderful religious blind faith that natural selection has incredible powers of engineering talent, able to craft superbly designed, complex, integrated systems like a human eye. Read the secular literature and you will never cease to be amazed at the complexity and detail and refinement of biological systems like the eye. Evolutionists claim that natural forces are competent to produce such results.
But then on the other hand they expect you to believe those same forces are so incompetent that they cannot fix simple flaws.
That's incoherent. It's like the old idea of junk DNA being "useless," when, as a Cornell geneticist prof. who has become a creationist pointed out to me in 2003, maintaining "useless" DNA carries a significant metabolic cost. If it were really useless it should be rapidly deleted by natural selection. Since it wasn't, it raised his suspicions as an evolutionist. And now he's no longer an evolutionist...
I don't even have a strong opinion on the topic. But if you were doing high fives with yourself as you wrote this list, you are a bit deluded about it's coherence, it's effectiveness, and how smart you think it makes you look.
Heimlich and his technique are quite pertinent to the question of evolution.
This whole list can be lumped into one category, regarding creationism as believed by Christians:
Why would a loving God allow so much suffering in the world?
And the answer is simple and covered in a book by C. S. Lewis called The Problem of Pain, among other publications.
The Bible covers it too. A good example is morning sickness. God told Eve that childbirth would be “painful” yet she would still be horny. ;)
If they had discovered any real evidence that would rule out intelligent design, evolution wouldn’t still be called a theory, now would it?
That question might interest you, but a biologist would ask a different question:
Why do so many features in living things look like the result of small, incremental changes?
Yes it would, just as there are theories of gravity.
Why do you ask?
You on Crack?
And why do some people look less like apes than other people? Are the less-ape-resembling people more evolved than the more-ape-resembling people?
“Evolution” is moving in the opposite direction.....we are getting more hairless.......because we no longer need “hair” to survive the cold.
Polartec works quite well.
No, there are alternative theories to gravity that have been posited..an evolution in thought, if you will...however, gravity itself is still a law.
Will have to figure out why then I have to keep shaving my legs .... hmmmm
Nothing I guess, if you're real smart and want to show up the whole class with your grasp of dictionary definitions and semantic minutia. Do you think maybe it has something do do with ID? You know the 'D' part? Funny how people convinced of their own cognitive specialness, while preening to show it, often reveal astonishing obtuseness.
Heimlich and his technique are quite pertinent to the question of evolution
Apparently that's self evident. Maybe it's often kicked around by those with lot's of time on their hands to debate this stuff. But, for us pedestrian types, can you explain what a chicken bone in a throat has to do with the origin of man? And please don't respond with "What does the origin of man have to do with...?". That's just a variation of "I know you are, but what am I?"
Laws are formulas depicting a mathematical relationship among measurable phenomena. They are not explanations.
Theories are explanations. Theories never become laws.
Words like evolution, however, can have more than one usage and definition. Evolution can refer to various theories of descent with modification, and it can also refer to the forensically fact of common descent.
The point of the question is hippos supposedly evolved from dinosaurs, and there are no more dinosaurs. Horses supposedly evolved from Eohippus, and there are no more Eohippi. Yet, man is supposedly evolved from ape, but apes and man coexist.
I'm sorry that you have time to write, but not time to read. I'm sorry that you lack the curiosity to ask questions when confronted with an interesting juxtaposition.
I'm not aware of anyone in the intelligent design movement who talks about the nature or attributes of the "D". I read a lot of ID websites, and most will ban you if you ask who or what the "D" is.
Just as when Americans descended from Europeans, there was no requirement that Europeans all die off in totality for Americans to separate and grow distinct from them.
Similarly all the Romance languages of Europe developed from Latin, but they changed as time went on and people developed new accents, words, phrases, and rules of language. Latin is a “dead” language, but there was no requirement that it die out completely and not develop into Italian.
Similarly the apes that exist now were not the same species that existed way back when, just as Italian is not the same language as Latin.
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Wheat and wheat gluten are not inherently processed.
In poor areas of the world where wheat is the primary crop people eat a whole lot more of it than they do in wealthy countries.
Americans don’t actually eat all that much wheat.
Come on now.....they didn’t “outlaw” DDT.....they just said that if a developing country USED DDT....they’d lose all their international funding.
.....and malaria deaths immediately jumped tenfold.
I think Mount Rushmore is a good example. When you see it, you know instantly that it was designed, and is not the result of natural forces. How do you know that? What are you detecting? Do you think you could design a computer program that could sift through photographs and pick out which ones were the result of design? You can see how you might be able to start down the road to actually being quantitative.
AFAIK, not a single "European" disease originated in Europe. All originated either in Asia (vast majority) or Africa, spreading into Europe.
So why are they always referred to as European diseases rather than as Asian (or even Eurasian, which would at least be accurate) diseases?
EVERYONE knows that Boston is the Hub of the Universe.....that’s why it’s called the Hub.
Because people tried to breathe the food instead of eating it. It's not a design flaw but user error.
Here's a question to ponder...
Our DNA is 98% the same as monkeys thus supposedly proving we evolved from apes. But consider our DNA is also exactly 50% the same as a banana. Going by the logic, is that why some of us have dry skin that peels? ; )
But we’ve been wearing clothing for a very long time ... almost as long as men going slowly bald ... well women also. I like to tickle evolutionists on questions they don’t seem to have an answer to .... }:-)
You'd think that the anti-evolution crowd would have enough faith in their views that getting the reassurance of others wouldn't be necessary.
Regardless of your views on intelligent design, CREATIONISM can answer ALL your questions! Praise the LORD!
Last I read, only ten percent of the banana genome had been mapped. Do you have a reference to your claim?
When I google 'Heimlich', all sorts of keywords paring it with things like 'evolution' "id" and so on, I come up with nothing other than this page. What exactly would I read if I weren't so incurious? What juxtaposition? It's as If I said "ID is crap because all people from Maine have bad acne." And when you asked me what the hell I meant by that, I replied that you should read more. Huh?
And why the desperate desire by the Darwinists to score cheap little debating points? Why the insecurity? What does Heimlich have to do with evolution vs. ID? Simple question, no?
I'm sorry that you lack the curiosity to ask questions when confronted with an interesting juxtaposition.
I'm sorry you can't understand that 'can you explain...' is a question that I asked because I have the curiosity you claim I lack. So one more time: What do Heimlich, choking, and his maneuver have to do with the debate? what juxtaposition? An answer sans some implication of your intellectual superiority would be appreciated out here in Hicksville.
>>Why do so many features in living things look like the result of small, incremental changes?<<
And I think that is a valid question. But it is not really related to the former question, except that both deal in perception of facts, as opposed to facts themselves.
But is it expanding in all directions at the same absolute rate?
It is also said that we share 40-50% of our DNA with cabbages...
That is much better than the Darwinist's claim that we are Garbage Pail Kids, LOL!
well we are somewhat related to bananas as are all living things on earth. Just depends how far back you want to trace.
Your link goes nowhere. Your source’s references go to dead web pages.
It's true. Prior to Newton, people gave unrelated explanations for the orbits of planets and the falling of objects. Some perceptions lead to increased understanding, and some perceptions lead nowhere. Just depends on what your goals are in organizing your perceptions.
It cites Steve Jones, Professor of Genetics at University College, London as saying this.
Here's another link to an interview with him where he mentions that:
Choking is the result of a kludge in our breathing and eating pathways. The question is: is the design of our airway the result of an incompetent designer, or is it the result of a series of slight modifications?
In poor areas of the world where wheat is the primary crop people eat a whole lot more of it than they do in wealthy countries.
Americans dont actually eat all that much wheat.
Thats where your wrong! Check out the website I posted before you judge. Do a little research. There is "hidden" wheat and gluten in so much food, you would never realize. Next time you are in a grocery, look at every label, and I mean carefully look. You'll be surprised what you find. Its an additive in many hidden forms. And by processed, I meant processed foods. Almost all processed food have a form of wheat/gluten in it. A large percentage of American diets come from processed foods.
Humans cannot eat "raw" wheat; it would kill them. It must be processed. In poorer countries, the grain of choice is rice (middle and far east) or corn (South America). It has to do with growing conditions. There is a "wheat belt" where wheat can grow. Those countries are the ones that eat more wheat and inheritantly have more of the health problems. Statistically the only two nations that consume more wheat are China and India (www.nationmaster.com). However, I am not sure of the studies in relationship to the rate of Celiac Disease in those countries.
The wheat in the wealthier countries like the US is genetically modified to have higher gluten levels, plus we add gluten to products, which is the offending part of the wheat. As a celiac and the parent of a celiac, I have done a lot of research into this.
Hidden sources of wheat/gluten in American Diets...
Filler Hydrolyzed Plant Protein
The following items may or may not contain gluten depending on where and how they are made, and it is sometimes necessary to check with the manufacturer to find out:
Modified Food Starch
Mono and Diglycerides Monosodium Glutimate (MSG)
Base food for yeast
So even if it doesn't say the word "wheat" or "gluten", it still can contain wheat/gluten! Even the glue on envelopes and the stuff that holds pills together has wheat gluten in it. You consume more wheat gluten than you realize.
Want to learn more...www.celiac.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.