This is just a cut and paste from a creationist website.
http://www.drdino.com/read-article.php?id=9
You keep complaining that people bring religion into this thread but then you go and cut and paste from a religious/creationist website. Why don't you read the statement of faith on the website: http://www.drdino.com/statement-of-faith.php
Also, using the phrase "Some more random thoughts" makes it appear as though they're your thoughts when they're not. They're plagarised from a discredited website run by a convicted criminal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_H..._and_renouncing_citizenship_.281996_-_2006.29
Why don't you try debating with your own words instead of cutting and pasting rubbish from creationist websites?
The story itself is interesting. I wonder what else we will discover. I'm disappointed that the local newspaper didn't run the story. I wonder how many teachers will continue to teach the myth.
This thread has been an interesting lesson in communication.
Sorry boys, I am talking about the title of the article. Not the thread. Please read what is written.!!!
Some more random thoughts:
Vestigial features are those parts of an organism, which are thought to be useless or no longer needed. The human tailbone is commonly referred 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.
That was my whole point at the start of the thread, how what we were taught in school as evidence for evoltion is now discredited.
Ok Ktrianta I admit that the powder was wet when the firecracker went off. You were referring to the "article" from the discredited Scadding you had cut and pasted into your reply and not the title of the thread. .
So you can't read either!!!
That was my whole point at the start of the thread, how what we were taught in school as evidence for evoltion is now discredited.
How the **** do you come up with this????????????????????????
So far the only amount of discredited information has been against your rantings.
Still waiting for the silver bullet!
This is just a cut and paste from a creationist website.
http://www.drdino.com/read-article.php?id=9
You keep complaining that people bring religion into this thread but then you go and cut and paste from a religious/creationist website. Why don't you read the statement of faith on the website: http://www.drdino.com/statement-of-faith.php
Also, using the phrase "Some more random thoughts" makes it appear as though they're your thoughts when they're not. They're plagarised from a discredited website run by a convicted criminal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_H..._and_renouncing_citizenship_.281996_-_2006.29
Why don't you try debating with your own words instead of cutting and pasting rubbish from creationist websites?
I love this thread as its given me a chance to rack up the message numbers next to my name ... its all a competition, ha!!! Seriously…
Couple of points:
1. Random thoughts: whose? Can you cite where this came from? I'll be honest, I am suggesting this has been lifted, and so its not your own thought(s), however much you might believe it.
Why?
a. This is a complete structure of a thought, not random at all.
b. The detail is based on 'findings' and hence has apparent scientific backing, so there must be some research here.
c. Compared to your other 'random' thoughts this is head and shoulders above the 'ranting’s' you have made previously.
2. Why have you still not addressed why religion should be considered separate from creationism.
3. I, and I guess I can speak for the other ‘boys’, we know the article and your thread title are different. We are making the point that if you wanted to be taken seriously, too late for that now, you would not have put the title in as you had for this thread. You did because you jumped on the first silly sentence from this ‘mythical’ article and saw the word myth, and equated it with the title. Whoops, don’t you look silly now?
There are lots of spelling and grammatical errors in what you have written, maybe a red-herring to make us think it is your own work. This aside, some of these errors are important in understanding the context, so, can you please let me know if you mean … “Vestigial features are taught to be leftover from an organism’s ancestors as it has evolved to a new way of life.” Do you mean taught? Or thought? This is pretty important.
MMM ... think I see a corner, and hear the faint noises of a reversing car! Beeeeep ... beeeep ... beeep ... BEEP
Ohhh and as that funny man TS has pointed out more than a few times, its nice to see vestigial spelt right – for now.
Has God got a belly button? If he has who made Him? Afterall we are made in His image are we not? So why do we have belly buttons then? Not bringing religion into it by the way! Could it be an Evolutionary thing? LMFAO !
I'm racking up my numbers too.
This was all done whilst on a teleconference so not bad for multi skilling. Some of us still are trying to do some work you know. Yes I did get the contents, but it covered the issues that were relevant without referring to religion so I was happy to use it.
Why do i need to address why religion should be seperate from creationism? That has nothing to do with this thread.
TS,
Sorry to have to correct you again, the article i referred to was the one shown in the first post on this thread. The quote from Scadding was alater post.
has any one actually read the original article????
I'm racking up my numbers too.
This was all done whilst on a teleconference so not bad for multi skilling. Some of us still are trying to do some work you know. Yes I did get the contents, but it covered the issues that were relevant without referring to religion so I was happy to use it.
Why do i need to address why religion should be seperate from creationism? That has nothing to do with this thread.
Since you guys are so adament that you want to bring religion into it, then here are a few links on the topic. Blow your fuses - hope that some might find these useful:
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/embryology_02.html
http://creation.com/do-any-vestigial-organs-exist-in-humans
http://us1.harunyahya.com/Detail/T/..._ANOTHER_BLOW_TO_THE_MYTH_OF_VESTIGIAL_ORGANS
Since you guys are so adament that you want to bring religion into it, then here are a few links on the topic. Blow your fuses - hope that some might find these useful:
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/embryology_02.html
http://creation.com/do-any-vestigial-organs-exist-in-humans
http://us1.harunyahya.com/Detail/T/..._ANOTHER_BLOW_TO_THE_MYTH_OF_VESTIGIAL_ORGANS
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?