how did man appear on earth

[CCAPalandiriel]

Why are there organs in the human body that no longer do anything?

I can pretty much guarantee that Jesus's appendix was functional.

Rofl what?:ignore: Jesus' appendix. Hmm.

Who says that they don't do anything? For the longest time, people thought that the only organs that did anything were the heart and lungs, and a few others. But now that we understand more about the human body, we know that the others do something.

For all we know, the appendix does do something, we just don't have the technology to know what.

 

[Riverwolf]

Rofl what?:ignore: Jesus' appendix. Hmm.

Who says that they don't do anything? For the longest time, people thought that the only organs that did anything were the heart and lungs, and a few others. But now that we understand more about the human body, we know that the others do something.

For all we know, the appendix does do something, we just don't have the technology to know what.

The original purpose of the appendix was to clean out the bad stuff from food. But now that we cook and clean our food before we eat it, the appendix has fallen out of use and is now useless.

In fact, there are many diseases known to be caused by this organ.

And there is no difference, as far as I know, between people who have one, and people who have had it removed for whatever reason.

The tonsils are the same way.

 

[roli]

My response is this: The whole story of Genesis is a myth. Adam and Eve are mythological characters. They didn't really exist. At most you can take them as allegorical symbols.

Humans did not just "appear". They were not formed out of dirt by "god". If anything, we can be traced to the beginnings of life in water. We were not formed as clay. No mold, no shaping, no placing in any garden.

This sounds like an absolute statement ..!
What makes you so certain,you have it right ?

 

[meogi]

For all we know, the appendix does do something, we just don't have the technology to know what.

You may be right. But we do know a few things about them: we don't NEED it as adults (unknown atm w/ early development) and it can kill you if it gets infected.

I know I've rarely gotton sick since I had mine removed (~12 years ago), and that I'd be dead if they had taken it out an hour later (burst as I was going into surgery).

Whatever its 'purpose,' it is strange design.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

You may be right. But we do know a few things about them: we don't NEED it as adults (unknown atm w/ early development) and it can kill you if it gets infected.

I know I've rarely gotton sick since I had mine removed (~12 years ago), and that I'd be dead if they had taken it out an hour later (burst as I was going into surgery).

Whatever its 'purpose,' it is strange design.

Had mine out in January...it was on the verge of bursting:cover:.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

The original purpose of the appendix was to clean out the bad stuff from food. But now that we cook and clean our food before we eat it, the appendix has fallen out of use and is now useless.

In fact, there are many diseases known to be caused by this organ.

And there is no difference, as far as I know, between people who have one, and people who have had it removed for whatever reason.

The tonsils are the same way.

If that is the case, then it makes sense. Lol, I can't recall why we got off on to this topic...
Oh, right. Yes. The fact that these organs have fallen into disuse does imply "evolutionary development", but only so far as to mean that we are adapting. Big whoop! Everything adapts to its surroundings. Just because we don't use it doesn't mean that we're one step closer to becoming a new species...

 

[Valjean]

The latest research finds that the appendix functions as a normal intestinal flora reservoir to "reboot" normal bowel function after something like a bout of dysentery has flushed it out or disrupted the proper bacterial balance.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

The latest research finds that the appendix functions as a normal intestinal flora reservoir to "reboot" normal bowel function after something like a bout of dysentery has flushed it out or disrupted the proper bacterial balance.

Hmm....thats interesting. I hadn't heard that before. Good to know...

 

[Riverwolf]

If that is the case, then it makes sense. Lol, I can't recall why we got off on to this topic...
Oh, right. Yes. The fact that these organs have fallen into disuse does imply "evolutionary development", but only so far as to mean that we are adapting. Big whoop! Everything adapts to its surroundings. Just because we don't use it doesn't mean that we're one step closer to becoming a new species...

There won't be another species of human being for another million years, I'd wager.

When one evolves, our species will still be around. There will be two species of human beings, likely with very little noticeable difference.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

And how exactly will that happen? What will distinguish the two besides a few minor differences?

 

[painted wolf]

Micro or macro evolution? If micro, then I would call that adaption. If you mean macro, then that has never happened across taxa.

I believe in "evolution"in the sense that life does indeed adapt, but evolution in the sense of "all life has come from a single-celled organism", that is absolutely preposterous. If you can show me speciation, you'll have a new convert.

Ever hear of the London Underground Mosquito? Observed speciation.
Speciation is actually been observed a few times.
In plants speciation due to polyploidy (an increase in the number of chromosomes) is very common. One can't help but trip over examples of this kind of species eruption in the plant world.
The Red-Vischasha rat (not really a rat) became a species this way.

What sort of "Taxa" are you talking about? That is a very broad category that coveres everything from species to domain... and its not used much in modern biology. Cladistics and Phylogenetics have pretty much removed/made obsolete those old classifications.

wa:do

ps. I find the idea that people pushing biblical creation find the idea of inbreeding a problem of evolution very amusing.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

Ever hear of the London Underground Mosquito? Observed speciation.
Speciation is actually been observed a few times.
In plants speciation due to polyploidy (an increase in the number of chromosomes) is very common. One can't help but trip over examples of this kind of species eruption in the plant world.
The Red-Vischasha rat (not really a rat) became a species this way.

How are you defining species? As being genetically isolated? Geographically isolated? I need to know how your defining "species" first. We need to be consistent in our arguments about the definition of this term first.

What sort of "Taxa" are you talking about? That is a very broad category that covers everything from species to domain... and its not used much in modern biology. Cladistics and Phylogenetics have pretty much removed/made obsolete those old classifications.

First of all, Cladistics and Phylogenetics are used to justify evolution, not prove it. Those terms were built on the presuppositions and paradigms that evolution is true. Those have no meaning if we are disputing evolutions validity.

Are you rejecting the old classification scheme of kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species?

I'm asking you if something from one class (such as sauria) can "evolve" into a member of another class (such as avies)? If so, what proof of that has been seen?

 

[Valjean]

Cladistics and phylogenetics describe evolution. They've supplanted the Linnean system because, with the advent of modern genetic technology, they describe relationships better.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

Heres a question to pose to evolutionists, then: what consequences does the idea of evolution have on social and moral constructs?

Might be a little (or a lot) off topic, but just throwing it out there for the heck of it...

 

[Riverwolf]

And how exactly will that happen? What will distinguish the two besides a few minor differences?

I'm not a scientist, so I can't really answer that with real certainty, but I suspect that for the first few ten thousand years, the only real differences will be genetic. Physically I suspect both species will look pretty much identical.

 

[Riverwolf]

Heres a question to pose to evolutionists, then: what consequences does the idea of evolution have on social and moral constructs?

Might be a little (or a lot) off topic, but just throwing it out there for the heck of it...

In theory, the theory of evolution should have ZERO impact on that.

Realistically, I know of people on both sides who would literally fight to the death to defend their side of the argument. ^_^

 

[Valjean]

Are you basing your assessment of evolution on it's impact on morality, as opposed to the empirical evidence supporting it?

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

In theory, the theory of evolution should have ZERO impact on that.

Realistically, I know of people on both sides who would literally fight to the death to defend their side of the argument. ^_^

But it does! Where on earth does the idea of good and evil come from? Why do we feel bad when we kill something, or feel good when we help someone? Doesn't that contradict "Survival of the Fittest"? We're supposed to look out for number one, but we don't like to kill and we like to be "good".

Does that make sense?

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

Are you basing your assessment of evolution on it's impact on morality, as opposed to the empirical evidence supporting it?

Yes. I'm not ignoring the empirical evidence, just looking at evolution from another angle.

 

[CCAPalandiriel]

I'm not a scientist, so I can't really answer that with real certainty, but I suspect that for the first few ten thousand years, the only real differences will be genetic. Physically I suspect both species will look pretty much identical.

Define a species: once again, you need to know exactly what that means. What separates one species from another?