Creationists: Can you tell me why these things exist?

Question

Wings on Flightless birds.
Hinds leg bones in whales.
Goosebumbs. (Animals that still use fur it makes them look larger).
Human tailborn (Coccyx).
Wisdom teeth.
Sexual organs in Dandilions (they reproduce now without fertilzation).
Male breast tissue and nipples!
The human Appendix!
All of these things exist. All of these thing once had a usefull purpose. Because of a little process called evolution, they now are on they're way out of the gene pool, give or take a million years...

just curious...

Answer 1

Hi,

First I’ll counter some of the arguments mentioned above.

* CT said : “The lack of space in the mouths of certain people - and by no means all people - is a consequence of the degeneration of the human race in regard to both genetics and lifestyles. This is quite contrary to the concept of evolution, which implies that we are improving and adding features.”

Evolution does not always imply that species must become more increasingly complex or must improve its skills. This is a common misconception. Body parts that are not used become useless and may eventually disappear. This is also called evolution.

Wikipedia states this under misconceptions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
“It is often assumed that evolution must lead to greater complexity, or that devolution ("backwards" evolution) can occur. Scientists consider evolution a non-directional process that does not proceed toward any ultimate goal; advancements are only situational, and organisms' complexity can either increase, decrease, or stay the same, depending on which is advantageous, and thus selected for.”

* CT said: “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.”

Many present species may almost have fully adapted to their environment, hence their vestigial features may have disappeared. Second, you have not investigated how much animals really have vestigial features, hence your conclusion does not fit. I am quite certain there are a lot of such species.

Here is a list of animals with useless features, inherited from their ancestors:
http://homepage.mac.com/lpetrich/www/writings/Vestigial.txt

* CT said: “The presence of lymphatic tissue may have come about by natural selection ..”

* CT said: “Whether vestigial organs exist or not does not prove or disprove evolution or creationism.”

This is a contradiction in terminis; first you state that it may have come about by natural selection, which is a part of evolution. Then you claim that it forms no evidence for evolution. Vestigial organs form evidence for evolution.

EvoWiki states this:
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Vestigial_features
“As a supporting evidence for evolution, vestigial organs have been vigorously attacked by creationists.”

* CT said: “The wings are indeed "useless" and derived from birds that once could fly. This is possible in the creationist model.”

Only if you believe your ‘God’ first created the universe and as a result evolution came into existence. Strict (biblical) creationism does not allow evolution as a fact. If you believe that vestigial features such as useless wings exist, then you must also credit (a part of ) evolution.

* CT said: “The wings have a function. Some possible functions, depending on the species of flightless bird, are: balance while running, cooling in hot weather, warmth in cold weather, protection of the ribcage during falls, mating rituals, scaring predators (emus will run at perceived enemies of their chicks, mouth open and wings flapping), sheltering of chicks, etc. If the wings are useless, why are the muscles functional, allowing these birds to move their wings?”

The function of the wings is irrelevant, as vestigial features are features that do not offer the SAME use as that of the ancestor. You just twice contradicted yourself, as you first claim the wings are useless, then you state they have a function. The second (implied) contradiction is that you first claimed:

“Vestigial does not mean "functionless." Even if the appendix does have a function, that doesn't refute it's status as a vestigial trait nor does it refute the evidence for common descent that the appendix provides. “

Out of this I assume you mean that vestigial features still have a function, but they serve a different function than that of the ancestors, which in fact makes them vestigial – not necessarily useless.

Then you claimed that although the wings are vestigial; they still serve a function (I quote “The wings still have a function”), but that doesn’t matter, as they are solely considered vestigial; they do not serve the same function as their ancestors. That is what only matters.

EvoWiki claims this:
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Vestigial_features
“As a supporting evidence for evolution, vestigial organs have been vigorously attacked by creationists. They often claim that for an organ to be "vestigial" it must be utterly useless. This is a misrepresentation: an organ in a modern animal may be described as vestigial if it does not serve the same function in the modern animal as the cognate organ served in an ancestor, even if the modern organ serves a completely different use. An example is the gas bladder of many fish, which is thought to be a vestigial lung, "left over" from the occasionally-air-gasping common ancestor of ray-finned fish and land vertebrates.”

To answer the question:
You won’t expect very powerful arguments from most strict creationists. There are many misconceptions about evolution. Not surprisingly is that the answerer above did not cover all vestigial features mentioned on top. There are way too many fossil records; there is even a mass of evidence, such as molecular evidence and morpholical evidence – that is the assumed transition from one species to another based upon their visual form – and genetic similarities. Denying evolution is the same as denying gravity.

Answer 2

Here is an excerpt explaining what the purpose of the appendix was for. I can't believe someone actually said it was to keep certain diseases under control...lol

Appendix, small, worm-shaped blind tube, about 3 in. (7.6 cm) long and 1/4 in. to 1 in. (.64–2.54 cm) thick, projecting from the cecum (part of the large intestine) on the right side of the lower abdominal cavity. The structure, also called the vermiform appendix, has no function in people and is considered a vestigial remnant of some previous organ or structure, having a digestive function, that became unnecessary to people in their evolutionary progress (see digestive system).

Notice the word 'evolution' in this paragraph.

Answer 3

The problem is that it can also be said that God made them to test peoples faith or that God doesn't need to explain himself to us.
Every piece of evidence supports evolution but it is impossible for evidence to be effective against a belief in an all powerful being capable of having manufactured all the evidence.
The fact that you and I find all of the creationist answers uninformed, ill educated in sciences and demonstrative of closed minds simply confirms in their minds that God must have created them that way because what is the evolutionary mechanism which favors the development of the Homo Idioticus?
"There are none so blind as them that will not see." is being quoted by both sides of this debate. The difference is that one side denies provable fact whereas the other denies the accuracy of a three thousand year old story about how everything was created which has no support other than itself.

Answer 4

I personally believe that the earth is some unknown number years old (billions or whatever...) the 6000 years started when God said let there be light and created the day! ( he hadn't created the concept of seperating days yet so of course it would appear to us like billions of years had gone past) Beyond that as to your HIV question, I have known God so long and learned to TRUST him (hard concept I know) through the death of his son Jesus for my sins so um....I am not trying to come up with meaningless "scientific" questions to try to trip him up... It does make sense that as sin gets worse, the curse on sin gets worse...(that sounds almost scientific...) But yeah...people weren't all about "sexual exploration" and so sexually depraved as a whole until this century. It is the case where people would rather come out of the closet than clean it these days.

Answer 5

Don't forget the one fewer ribs - this needs to be explained to...umm, and why do evolutionists assume that the atmosphere was the same millions of years ago as it is now? That's the basis of carbon dating, otherwise it would be impossible to know what ratio of C14 to C12 was in plants when they died. You know how it goes - the C14 decays and the C12 remains constant. But then some say that the atmosphere was different back then, and don't take into account that the universe is changing and expanding....and why do they don't feel the need to argue that Santa Claus doesn't exist?

Answer 6

Thats really an old argument.
Flightless birds??? not a clue.
Whales do not have hind leg bones-that is anchor points for missels in the reproductive system.
Goose bumps????
Human tail bone-no such thing. same as whale-anchor point.
Wisdom teeth??? come on-did you go to school???
Dandelions???? no clue??
Male breast-did you take biology???All humans are conceived female. duh??
Appendix is part of the immune system, like the tonsils, but most can live without them.
You are really dumb you know.

What kind of teeth did T-Rex have???? You do know he was herbivore don't you?? Most pics show him eating another animal. That was really a dumb argument. Wisdom teeth???-what are you driving at here???

Answer 7

Just out of curiosity.
How do we know they're not comming into the gene pool instead of leaving it,give or take a million years?

Answer 8

whales just have bones that look like hind legs...
who said that ALL winged creatures were to fly, certainely not you, cause your not God.
goosebumbs is a reaction with the skin when it gets cold.
the coccyx keeps your bowel in place.
wisdom teeth are just a name.
artificially made plants arent 100% real.
girls were created from guys, so they do have their limits on looking alike. and are you sure your calling fat tissues the right thing or not?
the human appendix was used for keeping certain diseases out of the body or under control. but those diseases arent around anymore (Egyptian time era).

Answer 9

Let me guess - "they did all kinds of stuff - before the fall". Or maybe they have a special purpose, but we're not intelligent enough to understand it.".

Hey, when you think somebody who died of a ruptured appendix (that's rUpture with a U) died because of sin or as part of god's plan, anything's possible.

Answer 10

I too am just curious... why you would post such an old argument? Did you just discover evolution? I think not, your bio suggest that because I believe in God that I am blind. I find it funny and agonistic of you as the same argument can be said about you. If you want me to listen to what you have to say then at least be orginial.

Believe what you want but don't make a social agenda out of it. I'm not pushing my God on you.

Wisdom teeth

The existence of wisdom teeth may very well take top dishonors as an alleged proof of evolution in the form of a vestigial human body part. It is stated that at one time in our alleged evolution we had more room in our mouths. It also has been suggested that we had to chew more than we do today. Both of these statements may be plausible, however they do not prove or even suggest that we are evolving. These teeth still function for chewing and are by no means useless or vestigial. The lack of space in the mouths of certain people - and by no means all people - is a consequence of the degeneration of the human race in regard to both genetics and lifestyles. This is quite contrary to the concept of evolution, which implies that we are improving and adding features.

Male breast tissue and nipples

“Human embryos are sexually dimorphic at first (i.e. contain characteristics of both sexes), because they all have basically the same genetic information, and this information is expressed as efficiently as possible as the embryo develops. This is design economy.” In the economy class I was required to take in my senior year of high school, I learned that “economy” deals with the problem of limited supply (of raw materials, time, and manpower) and unlimited demand. My Merriam–Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines it as a) “thrifty and efficient use of material resources: frugality in expenditures; an instance or means of economizing.” and b) “efficient and concise use of nonmaterial resources (as effort, language, or motion).” By these definitions, we can see that it would be folly for an automobile company to make models without mounts for air conditioning, etc., because to do otherwise would be to waste resources (i.e. more assembly line space, manpower) on a car that could never have features which could, should, and probably one day will be basic. Plus, the owner of the car, because of his/her unlimited demands, might wish to have some of the missing features installed after a little time, and maybe an increase in income.

Human tailbone

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.


Human Appendix

Vestigial does not mean "functionless." Even if the appendix does have a function, that doesn't refute it's status as a vestigial trait nor does it refute the evidence for common descent that the appendix provides.
Some people are born without an appendix, and have been documented as being fully able to lead completely normal lives without it. The absence of an appendix has no apparent ill effects. In fact, when performing abdominal surgery for other reasons, doctors sometimes remove a healthy appendix in order to prevent appendicitis. The appendix tissue is made from the wall of the large intestine, not from any specific lymphatic organ. The large intestine has many lymph nodes in it, and the lymph tissue in the appendix is derived from intestinal lymph tissue. The presence of lymphatic tissue may have come about by natural selection as a safeguard against the tendency of the now useless appendix to become easily infected due to food and other objects entering it, allowing bacteria to grow and fester by having lymphatic tissue in the intestines grow into the lining of the appendix. Whether vestigial organs exist or not does not prove or disprove evolution or creationism.


Birds

The wings are indeed "useless" and derived from birds that once could fly. This is possible in the creationist model. Loss of features is relatively easy by natural processes, whereas acquisition of new characters, requiring specific new DNA information, is impossible. Loss of wings most probably occurred in a beetle species that colonized a windy island. Again, this is a loss of genetic information, so it is not evidence for microbe-to-man evolution, which requires masses of new genetic information.

The wings have a function. Some possible functions, depending on the species of flightless bird, are: balance while running, cooling in hot weather, warmth in cold weather, protection of the ribcage during falls, mating rituals, scaring predators (emus will run at perceived enemies of their chicks, mouth open and wings flapping), sheltering of chicks, etc. If the wings are useless, why are the muscles functional, allowing these birds to move their wings?

I'll stop here, if you read your questions somewhere then you most likely have the answers. Once again, your bio states you're banging your head on the wall. Why? Your mission in life is to belittle Christians?