Vestigial Organs evolution myth

[Knobby22]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

I think that ktrianta is getting annoyed that a scientific discussion has been hijacked yet again by the zealots, yet again talking anti creationist and anti religion. Boring the t1ts of us all again.

However ktrianta you could have worded things better at the start of the thread, you should have known that people would bring religion into it.

I think both sides are arguing at cross purposes and not understanding each other.

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

ktrianta,

Ummm, Do you suffer from memory loss??

brty

Alzheimers hasn't kicked in yet. I have an excellent memory.

You misunderstood again. When I said another "evolution myth" it is to do with those chestnuts that are accepted as fact such as this one and many others which have been discarded along the way.

This is not the same as saying the whole neo darwinian evolutin model is a myth, irrespective of whether it is or isn't.

Think we all agree that the old vistigial organs lacks any scientific credibility and that is what this thread is about.

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

A myth in common vernacular is regarded as something that is believed without the basis of research and scientific testing - like unicorns, or invisible men living in the sky.

Mofra,

Happy to stick with the Oxford dictionary definition.

 

[CapnBirdseye]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

As I have said, why bring religion into this?

Erm? Isn't that your point?

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

I think that ktrianta is getting annoyed that a scientific discussion has been hijacked yet again by the zealots, yet again talking anti creationist and anti religion. Boring the t1ts of us all again.

However ktrianta you could have worded things better at the start of the thread, you should have known that people would bring religion into it.

I think both sides are arguing at cross purposes and not understanding each other.

Yes am trying to keep it away from there because look at the "Is there a God" thread and "the athiest" thread. Bottom line is you cannot change ones views on those and that is fair enough and who wants to look at some of the nonsense on those threads.

But looking at a view that was taught as scientific fact but is now incresingly been seen as a myth (oxford dictionary definition) is a much more interesting and educational approach i would have thought.

Maybe the title is a bit provocative, but it does generate interest rather than a boring title.

 

[spooly74]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

But looking at a view that was taught as scientific fact but is now incresingly been seen as a myth (oxford dictionary definition) is a much more interesting and educational approach i would have thought.

I remember this distinctly in school. Our teacher at the time (re: appendix) said its apparent vestigiality today does not mean it had no use in the past, or will not in the future.
Seems like a balanced approach. No fact, no myth.

One of the kids in class was born without an appendix.

 

[derty]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

It never ceases to amaze me, how precious people are about their belief in the theory of evolution. It seems to me that people seem to believe that the theory of evolution should be above criticism and that any attack on any aspect of it is a like to a red rag to a bull to the neo darwinian zealots.

I am as precious about evolution as I am any other scientific theory. It, like other theories, is the best explanation we have for what we see around us using our current understanding. They are not static. Once written down they are not incommutable. They are there to be questioned, improved or pulled down.

When any scientific theory is attempted to be discredited or attacked by groups or ideas that have little to no scientific credibility of course people will rally to the theories defence.

You say that you are not attacking evolution and imply that you are posting this for the benefit of scientific discussion:

This is ... thread ... is about one aspect of a theory which was widely taught as fact but has now been discredited.

It is not an attack on the whole edifice.

Was I the only one who was taught this in science at high school?

Though, your language within the thread, and indeed the title of the thread, Vistigial Organs evolution myth, does not gel with your stated objectives;

Another evolution myth bites the dust.

Always remember how in my high school science classes, this myth was proudly trotted out as proof for evolution.

Makes you wonder what sort of other nonsense we were taught back then.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt when you were attacked for peddling another agenda in the Dino to Bird Evolution Myth, but you are back again and are again describing a potentially superseded aspect of a theory as a Myth.

I do not believe you have posted these for the simple discussion of science. You have stated elsewhere that you do not believe in evolution and that you believe in creation. Why would you then be attempting to foster a discussion on the finer points of the theory of evolution when you don't believe in evolution?

My belief is in the traditional christian belief as expressed in God's revealation to us in the Bible.

...The fact that the universe follows certain laws is a better fit with a Creator God than a random explosion...

If a creator God exists, then it would be logical to assume that Natural selection is a better fit with a creator who creates using economy of design so that species adapt to their environment as they spread accross the earth. (speciation is indeed an intergarl part of creation models).

A creator God who creates different kinds to reproduce within their boundaries, is more logical than relying on random genetic copying errors to result in dinosaurs changing to birds to humans etc.

... I acknowledge that the biggest weakness in my position is that if you do not believe in a Creator god, then you cannot accept what I believe and that is fair enough and I respect your opinion but we both cannot be correct...

...God created all space, time and matter and it is ridiculous to limit God to the creation boundaries he has placed us in...

So ktrianta what are you really trying to achieve here?

 

[brty]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

ktrianta,

73 out of 91 posts about religion, evolution etc. Why are you really here???

brty

 

[darkside]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

Sorry darkside, but you have missed the point. This is not a thread about evolution v creation. This is about one aspect of a theory which was widely taught as fact but has now been discredited.

It is not an attack on the whole edifice.

Was I the only one who was taught this in science at high school?

Do others actually still believe this as being true and if so, does the latest research challenge that belief?

That is what this thread is about, not a comparison of 2 competing belief systems in evolution v creation.

No, don't be sorry i havent missed the point, I think perhaps you have, you opened the title with "Another evolution myth bites the dust". and then cry foul when taken to task over it, pick a team and then stick to it, don't go "oh it was never my intention to start a evolution vs creation debate", what did you think would be the reaction with that line. Wake up to yourself.

Once again , how many " God Botherers" would be upset if i started a thread, stating "another stupid creation myth is debunked"
maybe then i could cry "dumb" and say , "no it wasn't meant as a slander to your faith, just a topical discussion about science.

 

[darkside]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

ktrianta,

73 out of 91 posts about religion, evolution etc. Why are you really here???

brty

Not just this thread , but this site, surely there are other sites that subscribe to your idealogical if not misguided rants.

 

[trainspotter]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

I know quite a few people who have a brain but do not use it. Does this count as a vestigial organ? If God was so smart why did he put the testicles on a man ON THE OUTSIDE?

1) The wings on flightless birds.
2) Hind leg bones in whales.
3) Erector Pili and Body Hair
4) The Human Tailbone (Coccyx)
5) The Blind Fish Astyanax Mexicanus (born with eyes that cannot see)
6) Wisdom Teeth in Humans (unless you are a neanderthal)
7) The Sexual Organs of Dandelions (They clone themselves)
8) Fake Sex in Virgin Whiptail Lizards (they reproduce by parthenogenesis, a form of reproduction in which an unfertilized egg develops into a new individual.)
9) Male Breast Tissue and Nipples (testosterone causes sex differentiation in a fetus)
10) The Human appendix (Any secondary function that the appendix might perform certainly is not missed in those who had it removed before it might have ruptured.)

 

[Timmy]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

ktrianta,

73 out of 91 posts about religion, evolution etc. Why are you really here???

brty

& has started only 2 threads, both feature the words "evolution myth" in the title.

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

Good to see that the ferals are out in force. Why not play the man instead of the topic at hand.

Does it matter what I post on?

Have you people ever heard of free speech????

If you don't like the topic, just ignore it, really simple!!!!

I started threads on topics of interest to me and have tried try to keep religion out of it because of the nonsense that some people come up with when you bring religion into it.

It seems to me that you people are so insecure in your own beliefs on the neo darwinian evolutionary model that anything that shows one aspect of your belief system is wrong is met with howls of protest and is assumed to be an attack on the whole theory. Maybe you believe that your theory stands on flimsy ground and are too scared to confront it so any challenge is an attack on your belief system.

Well harden up people and grow some balls!!! Any belief which cannot be challenged is not worth having.

The dino to bird evolution myth and the vistigial organ myth contains information published in Peer reviewed journals (and if you don't believe me ask Timmy, because he is the resident ASF expert on peer review).

This may actually surprise people, but people post on things that actually interest them.

Here is a hint, when I start another thread on evolutionary myth's, if you don't like it then you don't have to read it.

Other people may find the topic of interest without you neo darwinian zealots frothing at the mouth at the hint of a challenge to anything to do with evolution.

 

[brty]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

ktrianta

you people are so insecure in your own beliefs

Does it occur to you that we are secure in our beliefs??

This may actually surprise people, but people post on things that actually interest them.

It is an investment forum, I would have thought most post about investment here.

when I start another thread on evolutionary myth's

How about you do that on a religious forum if you want to be left alone.

Good to see that the ferals are out in force

I know, what can we do about you??

brty

 

[derty]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

The best defence is offence hey?

As far as I can tell no-one here has an issue with evolution being challenged, that is not anyone's concern. The concern is with your motives and transparency.

With respect to the article you linked, it is extremely interesting and is a good example of the progressive nature of science. It does not confine the concept that evolution has left some vestigial components in some organisms to the dustbin. As trainspotter listed, there remain numerous examples of vestigial organs/bodyparts and behaviours that still support the concept. Your linked article did not even state that their research had killed the vestigial theory, it was solely your inference.

Maybe if you had called the thread something like: Vestigial Organs Found Not To Be So Useless, you may have garnered more of a scientific discussion.

btw, there is really no such thing as a Darwinian or even an evolutionist, it is just a Creationists term for those whose world view includes the Theory of Evolution. Calling people neo Darwinian zealots is such a give away.

 

[bassmanpete]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

Other people may find the topic of interest without you neo darwinian zealots frothing at the mouth at the hint of a challenge to anything to do with evolution.

Your title for the thread, and the previous one re birds from dinosaurs, is kind of provocative (and misspelt!)

Think we all agree that the old vistigial organs lacks any scientific credibility and that is what this thread is about.

Well, no we don't. There are many other examples of vestigial structures that definitely aren't myths, some of which were listed by trainspotter. It would probably help if you stated exactly what your beliefs are because, as someone else pointed out, if you don't accept evolution then the only alternative is creationism. Unless of course you have another theory, in which case you could be up for a Nobel Prize, current monetary value about A$2M. Invested wisely you could live on that

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

The best defence is offence hey?

As far as I can tell no-one here has an issue with evolution being challenged, that is not anyone's concern. The concern is with your motives and transparency.

Maybe if you had called the thread something like: Vestigial Organs Found Not To Be So Useless, you may have garnered more of a scientific discussion.

btw, there is really no such thing as a Darwinian or even an evolutionist, it is just a Creationists term for those whose world view includes the Theory of Evolution. Calling people neo Darwinian zealots is such a give away.

I am touched by your concern for my motives, but i have openly stated them many times, so what is to be gained by rehashing it if you cannot listen.

In future I will ensure that I pass on all my prospective threads by you first to get your approval before I post.

If you people stopped turning everything into religion, I would not need to use such terms.

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

ktrianta
It is an investment forum, I would have thought most post about investment here.
brty

Sorry i did not realise that this was an investment forum. Can you please ask the mods to remove the general Chat forum and any other forum not remotely related to investment.

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

Your title for the thread, and the previous one re birds from dinosaurs, is kind of provocative

Sorry, I did not realise that i was dealing with such a sensitive soul as yourself. Maybe I should run my posts through you first to make sure it does not offend.

 

[ktrianta]

Re: Vistigial Organs evolution myth

I know quite a few people who have a brain but do not use it. Does this count as a vestigial organ? If God was so smart why did he put the testicles on a man ON THE OUTSIDE?

1) The wings on flightless birds.
2) Hind leg bones in whales.
3) Erector Pili and Body Hair
4) The Human Tailbone (Coccyx)
5) The Blind Fish Astyanax Mexicanus (born with eyes that cannot see)
6) Wisdom Teeth in Humans (unless you are a neanderthal)
7) The Sexual Organs of Dandelions (They clone themselves)
8) Fake Sex in Virgin Whiptail Lizards (they reproduce by parthenogenesis, a form of reproduction in which an unfertilized egg develops into a new individual.)
9) Male Breast Tissue and Nipples (testosterone causes sex differentiation in a fetus)
10) The Human appendix (Any secondary function that the appendix might perform certainly is not missed in those who had it removed before it might have ruptured.)

Trainspotter,

Don't profess to be an expert but am sure that any good internet search can answer your queries. Suggest that some of the examples you have quoted are most likely genetic mutations which have caused a loss of function e.g. the flightless birds and the blind fish whereas others you can do your own research on the net.

For instance on the appendix see attached:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17936308