Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some humans are born with tails. They are removed at birth and cause no more problem than a dog having his tail docked. I wonder if they allowed it to remain if it could be used as a third appendage. It might be a real advantage when trying to text. You could hold the phone with your tail and have two hands to text.
I still haven't seen any "vestigal" organs. We have some traits that we no longer use...but so what?
You do realize that is what vestigial is?
Vestigial characters, if functional, perform relatively simple, minor, or inessential functions using structures that were clearly designed for other complex purposes. The most extreme test for vestigiality is to remove the character and observe the organism's viability and reproductive success. If these remain unchanged, the character is definitively vestigial. However, vestigial characters can certainly have functions; non-functionality is not a requirement.
These unused portions of DNA we are finding have purposes, not necessarily in the adult, but during development.
I assume that you are refering to the Coccyx bone above. This is not a tail. Humans do not have a tail. This is an important anchoring location for muscles. To say that humans have a tail is silly and unscientific. Similarity of stuctures no mater how minute, ie a tail compared to the human coccyx is not proof of common function or origin.
To say an organ is vestigial only make sense when one has a presupposition to evolution. It also shows your lack of understanding for the function of the organ in question.
As humans we are functioning the way we were created to. We do not have to compare humans to chimps because there is no connection and never was any connection to us and them, to our ancestors and theirs.
Well of course they are!!! everyone knows that the appendix were only put there so the doctors could bill us for taking them out!
Many flies (the diptera) have, by definition, vestigial wings. They are clearly and easily visible if you inspect the next fly you knock out of the air and care to pick up in the interests of self-education. Check out those tiny little knob-ended things right where you'd expect to find another set of wings, the halteres. The flies, being later evolvees, have reduced their overall wing area in conjunction with their aerodynamic improvements and conversion of past wings to halteres in order to be able to fly faster, maneuver better and just plain enjoy their better design.
Why did God burden all of the lesser insects with a less efficient system? Was God just learning also? Why, exactly, did He feel the need to experiment, and why do we keep finding extinct species? Weren't they all perfect to begin with? That's exactly what the Creationists tell us on an hourly basis, and yet...?
All other insects have four wings, some modified into wing coverlets (the coleoptera; the hard-shelled beetles. Hmm... too bad they habv to suffer, and it's obvious when you watch a beetle fly that it's usually having a much harder time of it. time to evolve, beetles! Oh, wait, they did...
(Waaaaayyyt for it; now he'll say that "the older type should then have gone extinct!". Evolution does not require extinction before the newer type appears. Never said that, but it's a good kindergarten-level argument against Evolution. Sadly, it's invalid and to use it in this contect, with this crowd, is to show one's inescapable ignorance on the subject. Sad. Sad.)
Well, there you have it; another bit of truth to deny. Have at it; your audience expects it.
kd, I won't bother to answer your questions this time. You'd only deny them all, no matter how informed I might be and ignorant you are. If you chose to enlighten yourself, you'd take a few minutes (that's all it would take with today's Internet) to learn instead of auto-deny. What a waste of your time, to continuously deny outright everything that isn't supernatural.
Well, this is a good forum to say this in. Finally!!!! I am now reading Stephen Jay Goulds "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory" it's about 1400 pages long, should take me a good part of the summer, thus far, it is facinating!!!! I've been a fan of Goulds since the days when he wrote all those monthly articles for Natural History magazine. IMHO the world lost a great brain when he died. (and a good writer as well)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And Yet Again....
