Posted on 09/17/2005 3:35:39 AM PDT by SeaLion
Please say it ain't so! :(
You might not see evolution of form there, but scientists do.
You are ducking the question. There appears to be a gradation from "monkey" (actually a chimp) in the top left corner to human in the bottom right. Quite a lot of fossils, for being "missing" don't you think?
Still, with modern gene splicing we will be able to have flying penguins and swimming owls in due course ~ it's just a matter of swapping parts.
serious question: do you know what a genetic mutation or mutant gene is?
as to eyes:
planaria have no lens, eyeball, humours, corneas, etc...
they have specialized nerves running from the ganglia which can be (loosely) considered its brain, terminating on the surface in clusters of photoreceptive cells. These are the most primitive eyes of which I am aware. They are called "eyespots". They are, as you say, useful only as light detectors. However, even such limited sensors can differentiate intensity and, due to the fact that they are located in bilateral symmetry across the planarian's long axis and are found on one end of the animal, can allow the planarian to determine that light's directionality.
Limited, then, but advantageous nonetheless.
IIRC, one of the links on the List O'Links has detailed examples of intermediate eye developments, from the simple eyespot to the advanced structure with two of which the human normally comes equipped.
FABULOUS!!! Now we have spontainuos mutations creating entirely different species of both sexes at the exact same time, "by accident" with completely different DNA. There must be some redundacy of dinosaur DNA in the strain then. But what about natural selection and adaptation? here we have you claiming sudden spontainious mutation and skull man there saying natural selection and adaptation. So which is it? Vestigial features are those parts of an organism, which are thought to be useless or no longer needed. The human tailbone is commonly to be such a feature. Vestigial features are taught to be leftover from an organism’s ancestors as it has evolved to a new way of life. The idea of vestigial features has been used as evidence for evolution since 1859 when Darwin first proposed that such features were evidence of descent of one organism from a completely different one. The logical consequence of this alleged transformation is that the "new" creatures will be left with some features, which are no longer needed in its new environmental niche.
Belief in evolution demands that we believe that each type of animal on earth is a result of descent from some previous life form. If this were the case, almost every creature should have many leftover features, which are no longer needed. Yet the more we learn about biology, the more we discover that every part of an organism serves some useful function. For example, the appendix is often said to be a useless leftover part of the human body. We know that the appendix serves as a type of lymphatic tissue in the first few months of life to fight disease. It is no more a useless feature than one of your lungs is useless just because you can survive with only one lung.
The acceptance of the idea that some parts of the human body are useless leftovers has had very tragic consequences. Based on the misguided concept that the human colon was a vestige of the past, Sir William Land and dozens of other surgeons stripped the colons from thousands of patients in order to "cure" a variety of symptoms. Many died. As late as the 1960's many people had their tonsils removed. This practice was again fueled by the mistaken belief that the tonsils were a useless leftover feature from our past. It is now known that they serve as an important disease fighting function and should not be removed.
There are true vestigial features as the blind eyes of cave salamanders. Blind salamanders have non-functional eyes because they live their entire lives in total darkness. At sometime in the past, normal salamanders found a niche in dark caves and apparently only those who mutated to blindness had a need to stay in the total darkness where they could compete for existence without blindness being a disadvantage. However, these salamanders are still salamanders, a mutation to blindness is hardly an upward improvement in complexity, and no new information has been added to the DNA of the salamander.
As to the question of the human tailbone, anatomists tell us that the tailbone serves a very important function in the human physiology. The coccyx(tailbone) is the point of insertion of several muscles and ligaments including the one which allows man to walk completely upright. Without a tailbone, people could not walk in a completely upright manner, dance a ballet, perform gymnastics, or stroll down the street with their arm around their spouse. Hardly a useless, leftover, vestigial feature! The human body is designed for maximum versatility-it is far more versatile than the body of any other creature. What other animal can perform the range of movement required for activities as diverse as ice-skating, pearl diving, skiing, and gymnastics. This range of movement would be impossible without the tailbone.
Evolution predicts that there should be leftover features as one organism turns into another. Creation predicts that although some life forms have degenerated and lost use of an original function, every part of an organism was designed to serve some useful primary or backup purpose. As we learn more about the biology of living organisms, including ourselves, it is readily apparent which theory fits the data.
Then tell us how and why the dinosarus evolved feathers. Better yet, why don't you go back and tell us how and how and why the first living self replicating cell "evolved." Since that only involves one cell that would obviously be easier to explain the "how and why" than explaining "how and why" a 5 ton feathered dinosaur evolved from a..... what did the dinosaurs evolve from, anyway?
Still, with modern gene splicing we will be able to have flying penguins and swimming owls in due course ~ it's just a matter of swapping parts.
Oh, so there were little green men doing this since the beginning of time was there? My god, Do you listen to what you say?
talk about taking a leap of faith!
Besides, that would be CREATION!
given:
1. large population of identical single-cell organisms, all dependent upon the same environment for nourishment and habitat.
2. ambient radiation
3. time
result:
1. large population of non-identical single cell organisms, with a wide range of genetic mutations (some lethal, some maladaptive, some trivial, some advantageous in one way, some advantageous in another way, some simultaneously advantageous AND disadvantageous, etc...), all competing in the same environment for nourishment and habitat.
2. a changed competitive paradigm
that was a ridiculously easy exercise of basic theory.
Except Moms of course who have that extra set on the back of their heads.
Here's the story on post #46, R.Scott.
Quote the article "At best, he's misguided..."
'Nuff said.
Quote the article "At best, he's misguided..."
Tree hugging is definitely safer!
I did limit the terms to normal humans, not Minor Deities ;)
given? you mean guessing:
Not only that, what norishment? no cells have divided at this point so what were they feasting on? Enviroment= Space? A bare rock earth yet to develop one?
Theory isn't FACT. PROVE IT.
Tigers are fluffy, but they're still plenty scary.
Also, large "fluffy" birds are pretty imposing. Ever been up close and personal with an Ostrich? I had a bunch surround my car in a nature preserve, it felt like a scene out of "Jurassic Park".
As for the fluffy T-Rex, picture being a mouse next to a nice, fluffy eagle which is looking you over. Or as in "A Bug's Life", being a grasshopper next to a songbird. Being big enough to rip you apart without breaking a sweat has a way of being scary, no matter how fluffy.
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.