More Strong Evidence for Evolution: Anatomical Vestiges

[Confounding]

And yet NO ACTUAL PROOF none nada zip. DNA that is not quite a match does not prove something evolved from something else.

Do you have any evidence that people were zapped into existence from nothing? Do you really think magic is real? You believe in the Garden of Eden? Noah's Ark? Do you believe somebody actually walked on water? How much of the Bible do you take literally?

YOU ARE A GROWN MAN THAT BELIEVES IN FAIRY TALES!


I'd make fun of you more but I actually feel bad for you.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And yet NO ACTUAL PROOF

You mean, no proof that you have ever understood. Your proud of orange e amd mild stupidity does not undermine or affect at all the mountains of mutually supportive, empirical evidence gained from 150 years of scientific research.

DNA that is not quite a match does not provesomething evolved from something else.

Nobody said it did. Your bizarre comment betrays your complete ignorance of the material.

And as I repeated several times you can not actually provide any proof.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And as I repeated several times you can not actually provide any proof.

And you sound dumber every time you say it. For one, any child who can read can provide proof. For two, the fa t that you are too proudly ignorant to look it up yourself shows people they should not waste their time.

 

[abu afak]

Long-Lost Horse Toes Found
A new study reveals modern horses retain vestiges of all five ancestral toes
By Brian Switek - March 21, 2018 - Scientific American
Long-Lost Horse Toes Found

Horses are on point. This is literally true. From asses to zebras, all living horses stand on a single toe - the equivalent of our third digits of our hands and feet.

The singular nature of horse legs has made equids evolutionary favorites. Their fossil record is so extensively known that for over a century they have been icons of transcendent change, a tangle of petrified skeletons stretching back over 50 million years documenting how tiny, forest-dwelling species like Eohippus scampered around on multiple toes until life on hard, grass-covered plains nudged horses towards their more familiar modern forms.

Modern horses carry some signs of these changes. Now and then a horse is born with vestigial side toes, demonstrating that the genetic and developmental framework for those additional digits still exists. And even in horses with the expected single hoof, the front legs still bear two tapered bones on the side of the primary column of the feet - split bones - that are remainders of ancient, additional toes.

This is textbook stuff, an easily-accessible demonstration of how every organism is a mix of the old and new. But we’ve apparently been missing other clues wrapped in equine flesh. Horses don’t just have parts of three toes. They retain signs of the standard mammalian complement of five digits.

Anatomist Nikos Solounias and colleagues found the long lost piggies. It wasn’t as simple as just taking another look at a modern horse. Evolutionary context was needed, earlier horses such as the four-toed Eohippus, three-toed Mesohippus, and single-toed Dinohippusproviding background and fetal horse specimens allowing insights into development. In the end, the researchers not only found the “missing” digits but changed the anatomical map of the horse foot.

As far as the front legs go, Solounias and coauthors point out, the traditional structure largely holds. Horses stand on their third finger, with the lateral splints being remnants of fingers two and three. But each of those splints have ridges on the bottom sides, which the experts suggest are the remainders of the lost digits one and five (think your thumb and pinky).

The rear feet are a different story. There’s a specialized structure called the frog on the bottom of the back hoof that’s the remainder of the second and fourth toes. But there are more subtle structures - called “the wings and hoof cartilages” - that are the remnants of the first and fifth toes.
[.......]
`​

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Horses provide proof that evolution occurs WITHIN a species at no time does it provide proof that a single mammal species evolves into 2 or more different species

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Horses provide proof that evolution occurs WITHIN a species at no time does it provide proof that a single mammal species evolves into 2 or more different species

Of course, the vestigial limbs we observed can be compared directly with structures in the ancestors of horses, as can all of the other structures. In this way, we can easily see the progression of the evolution of different species in the lineage of rhoses.

 

[abu afak]

Nobody said it did. Your bizarre comment betrays your complete ignorance of the material.

And as I repeated several times you can not actually provide any proof.
[/QUOTE]Science doesn't deal in "Proof," only Math does.
What would send a man to death "Beyond a reasonable doubt," is not "Proof" in the absolute sense, and is in fact weaker than the Overwhelming EVIDENCE for Evolution.

`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Nobody said it did. Your bizarre comment betrays your complete ignorance of the material.

And as I repeated several times you can not actually provide any proof.

Science doesn't deal in "Proof," only Math does.
What would send a man to death "Beyond a reasonable doubt," is not "Proof" in the absolute sense, and is in fact weaker than the Overwhelming EVIDENCE for Evolution.

`
[/QUOTE]
Don't waste your time with that guy. He has admitted that no amount of evidence could convince him.

 

[ding]

Another Evidence of Evolution.
Just part of an Overwhelming body of such.
One rarely mentioned but very telling.
Life can be traced to a continuum, with many creatures, including us, having anatomical vestiges of our evolutionary ancestors.
An 'immaculate creation' event wouldn't leave useless organs/etc.

Heavily Edited incl Numerous illustrations within as well as references deleted for brevity.

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
Douglas Theobald, Ph.D.
Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges

Some of the most renowned Evidence for evolution are the various nonfunctional or rudimentary vestigial characters, Both Anatomical and Molecular, that are found throughout biology. A vestige is defined, independently of evolutionary theory, as a reduced and rudimentary structure compared to the same complex structure in other organisms. Vestigial characters, if functional, perform relatively simple, minor, or inessential functions using structures that were clearly designed for other complex purposes. Though many vestigial organs have no function, complete non-functionality is not a requirement for vestigiality...​

[.......]​

Geoffroy was at a loss for why exactly nature "always leaves vestiges of an organ", yet he could not deny his empirical observations. Ten years later, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) identified several vestigial structures in his Zoological Philosophy​

[.......]...these "Hypocritical" structures profess something that they do Not do—they clearly appear designed for a certain function which they do Not perform. However, Common Descent provides a scientific explanation for these peculiar structures. Existing species have different structures and perform different functions. If all living organisms descended from a common ancestor, then both functions and structures necessarily have been gained and lost in each lineage during macroevolutionary history. Therefore, from Common Descent and the constraint of gradualism, we predict that many organisms should retain vestigial structures as structural remnants of lost functions. Note that the exact evolutionary mechanism which created a vestigial structure is irrelevant as long as the mechanism is a gradual one.​

​

Confirmation:​

There are Many examples of rudimentary and Nonfunctional vestigial characters carried by organisms, and these can very often be explained in terms of evolutionary histories. For example, from independent phylogenetic evidence, snakes are known to be the descendants of four-legged reptiles. Most Pythons (which are legless snakes) carry Vestigial Pelvises hidden beneath their skin.. The Vestigial pelvis in Pythons is Not attached to vertebrae (as is the normal case in most vertebrates), and it simply floats in the abdominal cavity. Some lizards carry rudimentary, Vestigial Legs underneath their skin, undetectable from the outside...​

Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are blind yet have rudimentary, Vestigial eyes....​

[.......]​

The ancestors of Humans are known to have been herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as Wisdom Teeth).​

Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted [*]. These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death [*]​

​

Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals..."​

​

Yet another human Vestigial structure is the coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult. The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system ... Our internal tail is UNnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications)...""​

[.......]​

​

How many Millions of H sapiens and immediate predecessors, suffered and died from Wisdom Teeth impaction/infection?.​

Were it not for Modern dentistry in the last 100 years (yes, even after Jesus), humans who had these impacted/infected Wisdom teeth (most) would have slowly died out and the specie would have been gradually purged/adapted/Evolved eventually as in all traits of all animals.​

Everything that ever lived was, and is, 'intermediate' and constantly Evolving.​

`​

Belief in a creator and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

Gradualism will eventually lose out to punctuated equilibrium.

 

[abu afak]

Belief in a creator and evolution are not mutually exclusive.
Gradualism will eventually lose out to punctuated equilibrium.

Belief in Evolution is Inconsistent with Creationism.
They only can be consistent if the creator was just a spark, and not the planter of Trees and species-as-is on the planet.
Alas most all the religionists Trolling this section believe the latter.

`

 

[ding]

Belief in a creator and evolution are not mutually exclusive.
Gradualism will eventually lose out to punctuated equilibrium.

Belief in Evolution is Inconsistent with Creationism.
They only can be consistent if the creator was just a spark, and not the planter of Trees and species-as-is on the planet.
Alas most all the religionists Trolling this section believe the latter.

`

Evolution is not inconsistent with God creating existence.

I wouldn't dare think of limiting what He could do.

 

[abu afak]

Evolution is not inconsistent with God creating existence.

I wouldn't dare think of limiting what He could do.

NONRESPONSIVE.
Again:

Belief in Evolution is Inconsistent with Creationism.
They only can be consistent if the creator was just a spark, and not the planter of Trees and species-as-is on the planet.
Alas most all the religionists Trolling this section believe the latter.​

Are we clear?
`

 

[ding]

Evolution is not inconsistent with God creating existence.

I wouldn't dare think of limiting what He could do.

NONRESPONSIVE.
Again:

Belief in Evolution is Inconsistent with Creationism.​

They only can be consistent if the creator was just a spark, and not the planter of Trees and species-as-is on the planet.​

Alas most all the religionists Trolling this section believe the latter.​

Are we clear?
`

I am only clear in that your IQ must hover somewhere around 100.

Because it would be illogical to assume the Creator of existence couldn't do whatever He wanted to do which is inconsistent with what you are claiming.

 

[abu afak]

I am only clear in that your IQ must hover somewhere around 100.

Because it would be illogical to assume the Creator of existence couldn't do whatever He wanted to do which is inconsistent with what you are claiming.

We are not arguing about the power of the creator. (who BTW is NOT IN EVIDENCE here!)
We are arguing about what is consistent with Evolution.
You can't even grasp the issue, or should I say, have NO answer to my two UNanswered posts.
So you carry on about 'the creator.'
That's again, incoherent and nonresponsive ding-dong.

`

 

[ding]

I am only clear in that your IQ must hover somewhere around 100.

Because it would be illogical to assume the Creator of existence couldn't do whatever He wanted to do which is inconsistent with what you are claiming.

We are not arguing about the power of the creator. (who BTW is NOT IN EVIDENCE here!)
We are arguing about what is consistent with Evolution.
You can't even grasp the issue, or should I say, have NO answer to my two UNanswered posts.
So you carry on about 'the creator.'
That's again, incoherent and nonresponsive ding-dong.

`

You limit evolution to biology. I don't. So don't try and tell me about evolution.

 

[abu afak]

#3. Still waiting you SICK FREAK: (and I will keep posting it until you answer coherently and on point.)
You can't.

ding said:
Evolution is not inconsistent with God creating existence.
I wouldn't dare think of limiting what He could do.

abu afak: NONRESPONSIVE.
Again:

Belief in Evolution is Inconsistent with Creationism.
They only can be consistent if the creator was just a spark, and not the planter of Trees and species-as-is on the planet.
Alas most all the religionists Trolling this section believe the latter.

Are we clear?
`

 

[ding]

#3. Still waiting you SICK FREAK: (and I will keep posting it until you answer coherently and on point.)
You can't.

ding said:
Evolution is not inconsistent with God creating existence.
I wouldn't dare think of limiting what He could do.

abu afak: NONRESPONSIVE.
Again:

Belief in Evolution is Inconsistent with Creationism.
They only can be consistent if the creator was just a spark, and not the planter of Trees and species-as-is on the planet.
Alas most all the religionists Trolling this section believe the latter.

Are we clear?
`

Asked and answered. Evolution is not inconsistent with God creating existence. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

 

[ding]

It's no accident that the universe popped into existence being created from nothing with laws that predestined intelligence to arise.

 

[ding]

Are we clear?

I certainly was clear about what I wrote. You? Not so much. You seem to be having a tantrum.

 

[abu afak]

Horses provide proof that evolution occurs WITHIN a species at no time does it provide proof that a single mammal species evolves into 2 or more different species

For the 100th time Brain-damaged CLOWN.
Science does not deal in "Proof", science deals in EVIDENCE... which is Overwhelming for Evolution.

`