What are the questions that only evolution can answer?

Question

I seems common to find that living organisms tend to have certain things (such as organs or tissues) that don't seem to be useful and their existance can only be explained by evolution (that these things were once useful for an ancestor).

Strange things like why men have nipples when they don't feed mild, birds with wings but still don't fly, ....etc.

Are there more examples. I also want to listen to if someone disagrees with my examples.

Answer 1

in stem cell biology, it explains why animals higher than salamanders only have limited regenerative capacity (got lost at that point). in immunology, it explains how we got an immune system (integration of a transposase) and at what point that occured. in medicine, it explains how drug resistance occurs (natural selection of resistant organisms). in epidemiology, it explains the prevalence of sickle cell anemia and gapdh deficiency (malaria), and the rise of the gene for digesting lactose (domestication of cows). it explains why things are not made perfectly, but rather just good enough (selective pressure). it explains how the genetics of different organisms are related, and why we don't see genetics that are mixed and matched (common ancestors, branching structure).

of course, you can always go with the christians, who until the year 2000 insisted that the sun goes around the earth. let's not forget how the slave states used the bible to justify slavery, or how they used it to deny women the right to vote or hold public office. science corrects itself through time. as far as truth and reality go, religion is just as wrong today as it was 2000 years ago. if you are really curious, go to the link below to debunk creationist claims.

Answer 2

Dont' limit youself to vestigial organs.

Why do humans share the same color vision with the Old World primates?

Most mammals ... are "colorblind". So are almost all of primates in Central and South America (the New World primates). But humans and the Old world primates (the African and Asian monkeys, and the great apes (chimps, gorillas, orang utans, etc.) have color vision. Not only that but they have the *same type* of three-color vision ... the same structure of photopigments, controlled by the same genes located on the same chromosomes.

Evolution answers this with the notion that color vision arose in the primate line *after* the continental split between Africa and the Americas. The exception that proves the rule is the howler monkey ... this is the only New World primate that has color vision, but it has a different three-pigment system, and the genes for this occur on different locations in the chromosomes ... which is evidence that color vision evolved *separately* in this one New World primate.

Why do dolphins embryos have leg buds?

Why do whales and dolphins have hip and leg bones?

Why do human embryos have a tail and gill folds?

Why do humans have muscles to wiggle their ears? (This is useful in animals for turning the ears towards sound ... notice how this works in dogs and cats.)

But the biggest one:

Why does ALL DNA show signs of common ancestry?

I'm not just talking about the genes that code for structures ... but also the junk DNA that has gone along for the ride. There are tell-tale "typos" (transcription errors) in this DNA that exist in certain branches of evolution and are absent in others. All of these "typos" together point to common ancestral relationships.

... But if you are interested in more vestigial structures:

Why do we have a plantaris muscle?

The plantaris muscle is a long thin muscle in the human foot and calf that is so useless that surgeons remove it when they need muscle tissue for reconstructive surgery elsewhere (as in heart surgery). In fact, 9% of humans are born without any plantaris muscle at all. But in other primates, this same muscle is much better developed and is the muscle used for grasping with the feet.

Why the big toe?

Toes are useful for balance ... but there is no reason there needs to be the same number of toes as fingers ... or that the inside toe is bigger and fatter than the others. Also, notice that there is one fewer bone in the big toe (count the knuckles, or see a ) than in the other toes, just the way your thumb has one fewer bone than the other fingers. Finally, notice that you have more muscles and nerves dedicated to your big toe (you can move it more independently than you can the other toes, which tend to move as a group).

All this is evidence that the big toe was once an opposable thumb on the foot, and needed to be bigger and stronger than the other toes for purposes of grasping.

I could go on and on ... but I'll stop here.

Answer 3

--Evolution does not have an answer for its mythical vestigial organs!

*** g05 2/22 p. 21 “Junk” DNA? ***

MANY researchers approach the study of biology, genetics, and related fields from the standpoint of the theory of evolution. Often, this view has led them to false conclusions. For example, early Darwinists classified certain organs, such as the appendix, the pituitary gland, and the tonsils, as vestigial. They considered them to be evolutionary leftovers because these organs seemed no longer to have any function. In time, however, the important role of these organs came to light. Evolutionists, therefore, had to discard their earlier views.

A similar development recently occurred in the field of genetics. Early research suggested that about 98 percent of the DNA in humans and other organisms had no function. Hence, many who were influenced by the theory of evolution assumed that this DNA was “evolutionary junk”—a view that quickly became orthodox.

Once again, however, an assumption rooted in Darwinism proved to be false. Recently, scientists have discovered that “junk” DNA plays a vital role in the body by yielding special forms of RNA (ribonucleic acid) that are vital for life. John S. Mattick, director of the Institute for Molecular Bioscience at the University of Queensland in Australia, feels that the hasty acceptance of the “junk” DNA theory is “a classic story of orthodoxy derailing objective analysis of the facts, in this case for a quarter of a century.” This failure, he adds, “may well go down as one of the biggest mistakes in the history of molecular biology.”

Is it not much wiser to view DNA as having an intelligent Designer? People with such a viewpoint realize that in time the reasons for puzzling aspects of God’s handiwork usually come to light. And instead of disillusioning them, such findings fill them with even greater awe.—Proverbs 1:7;

*** Multiple Articles ***

*** g74 2/8 p. 16 Are Any Organs Really “Vestigial”? ***

Are Any Organs Really “Vestigial”?

FOR many years various organs of the human body were called “vestigial” by evolutionists, that is, the last vestiges of organs that supposedly once had a use, but were no longer needed because of the claimed advance up the evolutionary ladder. Of interest in this regard is the small gland that is shaped like a pinecone and hence called the “pineal” gland. Though it is located near the center of the brain, it is not part of the brain. “Until very recently” it was thought that “the pineal in man served no biologic purpose and was merely a vestige,” reported the journal Hospital Practice. Now the pineal has been shown “to possess a unique ability to produce melatonin.” This is a substance that affects the brain, the reproductive system, as well as the pituitary, adrenal and thyroid glands.

Scientists believe that in man the pineal gland “exerts a control over the body, specifically by regulating the body clock.” (Science Digest, September 1972) The pineal does this evidently by secreting various chemicals. Thus it is believed that the pineal gland may chemically supervise many of the involuntary activities of the human body, such as helping to make body temperatures increase during the daytime and decrease at night.

Another gland long thought to be useless is the thymus. In an article entitled “The ‘Useless’ Gland That Guards Our Health,” Reader’s Digest stated:

“For at least 2000 years, doctors have puzzled over the function of a pinkish-grey bit of tissue lying just below the neck and behind the breastbone—the thymus gland. . . . Modern physicians came to regard it, like the appendix, as a useless, vestigial organ which had lost its original purpose, if indeed it ever had one.

“In the last few years, however, the dogged detective work of a small band of Americans, Britons, Australians and Swedes have cracked the thymus enigma. These men have proved that, far from being useless, the thymus is really the master gland that regulates the intricate immunity system which protects us against infectious diseases. . . .

“But is the thymus the only organ regulating our immunity system? Recent experiments have led researchers to believe that the appendix, tonsils and adenoids [once these too were tagged as vestigial] may also figure in the antibody responses.”

Answer 4

I know a few. The hair on the human body is vestigal and so are the pilloerector muscles that make them stand up. Human body hair is so scanty that it no longer serves it's purpose of conserving heat. Another example is the human eye! How many people do you know that need contacts or glasses? Just shows that they eye is still evolving to perfection. Also the fact that humans have so many back, hip, and knee problems shows that we are still evolving for walking upright.

Answer 5

Dogs have "dew claws" they don't need.

Horses have remnants of another toe that appears as an ugly growth on the inside of their upper front legs.

Don't forget the appendix in people.

Nipples are not a good example, however. They are not a remnant of evolution, but a remnant of all embryos starting out as female.

Answer 6

You forgot to mention the appendix.