PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
1. Science is the collection of correct knowledge. How does anyone judge ‘correct’ knowledge, as none have performed all the experiments necessary to document same. Since a frame of reference is necessary, most of us “accept” as correct that which we find most folks acknowledge as correct.
a. I contend that therein lies the difference between consensus and science. But, it seems to me, that to find comfort in what we believe to be true, one must incorporate new facts, into our beliefs. Case in point, vestigial organs.
2. “Vestigial Organ: This is an organ that served a purpose in the distant ancestor of an organism, but is not longer pertinent in the presently existing, recently evolved, organisms. An example would be the muscles we have that can move our ears a bit. Since human ears cannot be reorientated like some animals can (and presumably our long gone ancestors from million of years ago) then those muscle do not serve much purpose (except for mild entertainment). Another example would be our tail bone.” What is a vestigial organ? give an example? - Yahoo! Answers
a. Since the days of Darwin, numerous scientists and educators have argued that “useless” or “vestigial” organs prove the theory of evolution. “Organs or parts Â… bearing the plain stamp of inutility are extremely common, or even general, throughout nature,” (Darwin, “ On the Origin of Species”) “It would be impossible to name one of the higher animals in which some part or other is not in a rudimentary condition.” His prime examples: the appendix and the coccyx (tailbone).
b. In 1895, German anatomist Robert Wiedersheim compiled a list of human structures he considered vestigial, which came to be regarded as the official one: More than 180.
3. The idea of vestigial organs is not a fringy, peripheral support of the evolutionary theory, but lies at its very heart. American zoologist Horatio Newman said that these organs represented “evidence that man has descended from ancestors in which these organs were functional.”
a. The rapid embrace of the vestigial organ belief deepened the traction of the evolutionary theory, and also spawned new trends in the medical community. Henry Drummond wrote in “The Ascent of Man,” that the appendix is “a veritable death trap,” and also cautioned readers of the perils of other organs lurking inside of their bodies. Throughout much of the 20th century, medical practitioners removed appendixes, tonsils and other “dangerous” organs as routine operations.
4. Now, here is the point I was getting at: all who learned the above re: vestigial orgns’ inutility, and saw how it bolstered the theory of evolution….what do you do with new facts that eviscerate (pun intended) that view? Do you believe in science…or in ‘secular science’?
5. Immunologist William Parker at Duke University Medical Center said, “Maybe it’s time to correct the textbooks. Many biology texts today still refer to the appendix as a vestigial organ” (LiveScience, Aug. 24, 2009). He and his colleagues discovered that the appendix serves as a storehouse where good bacteria can lie in wait until they’re needed to repopulate the stomach after an episode of diarrhea or other intestine-emptying illness.
a. A separate recent study showed that the appendix conducts operations similar to those of the tonsils at the opposite end of the alimentary canal, which increase resistance to throat infections. (The tonsils, too, were long branded by evolutionists as useless and problematic.) A 2011 study showed that the appendix also helps generate, guide and train white blood cells, especially for fetuses and children. Valerie O’Loughlin, a professor of medical sciences at Indiana University, said it is “the site where a type of white blood cell called b-lymphocytes can be recognized and where the newborn and young child’s body can start to recognize certain pathogens that are in the [gastrointestinal] tract.”
b. Today, removal of a healthy appendix can be considered medical malpractice, Appendicitis Surgery and Malpractice
6. In 1994, however, renowned anatomy professor David Menton produced evidence disproving the idea that the coccyx is vestigial. “[M]ost modern biology textbooks give the erroneous impression that the human coccyx has no real function other than to remind us of the ‘inescapable fact’ of evolution,” Menton wrote in Essays on Origins.
7. By 1971, Encyclopedia Britannica labeled just over 100 human organs as vestigial. Research yielded more and more understanding about the importance of organs once called mere “accidents of nature.” One by one, they were proven to serve vital functions in the human body. For many biologists, Wiedersheim’s list—that once included over 180 vestigial organs—is now down to zero.
a. History is littered with body parts that were called "useless" simply because medical science had yet to understand them, Laitman (director of anatomy and functional morphology at New York City's Mount Sinai School of Medicine and president-elect of the American Association of Anatomists( said. Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
8. Again, the idea of vestigial organs lies at the heart of the evolutionary theory. As recently as 2004, prominent evolutionist Douglas Theobald said, “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” (29+ Evidences for Macroevolution).
9. The heart of the vestigial organ argument, then, is either an acknowledgment of ignorance (“I wasn’t able to discover the function”), or a scientifically flawed statement (“It has no function”). Observational or experimental science allows no place for such a statement.
10. It will be interesting to see what the believers in Darwinian evolution do with the above facts.
Source of the above: Evolution?s ?Unnecessary? Organs - theTrumpet.com
a. I contend that therein lies the difference between consensus and science. But, it seems to me, that to find comfort in what we believe to be true, one must incorporate new facts, into our beliefs. Case in point, vestigial organs.
2. “Vestigial Organ: This is an organ that served a purpose in the distant ancestor of an organism, but is not longer pertinent in the presently existing, recently evolved, organisms. An example would be the muscles we have that can move our ears a bit. Since human ears cannot be reorientated like some animals can (and presumably our long gone ancestors from million of years ago) then those muscle do not serve much purpose (except for mild entertainment). Another example would be our tail bone.” What is a vestigial organ? give an example? - Yahoo! Answers
a. Since the days of Darwin, numerous scientists and educators have argued that “useless” or “vestigial” organs prove the theory of evolution. “Organs or parts Â… bearing the plain stamp of inutility are extremely common, or even general, throughout nature,” (Darwin, “ On the Origin of Species”) “It would be impossible to name one of the higher animals in which some part or other is not in a rudimentary condition.” His prime examples: the appendix and the coccyx (tailbone).
b. In 1895, German anatomist Robert Wiedersheim compiled a list of human structures he considered vestigial, which came to be regarded as the official one: More than 180.
3. The idea of vestigial organs is not a fringy, peripheral support of the evolutionary theory, but lies at its very heart. American zoologist Horatio Newman said that these organs represented “evidence that man has descended from ancestors in which these organs were functional.”
a. The rapid embrace of the vestigial organ belief deepened the traction of the evolutionary theory, and also spawned new trends in the medical community. Henry Drummond wrote in “The Ascent of Man,” that the appendix is “a veritable death trap,” and also cautioned readers of the perils of other organs lurking inside of their bodies. Throughout much of the 20th century, medical practitioners removed appendixes, tonsils and other “dangerous” organs as routine operations.
4. Now, here is the point I was getting at: all who learned the above re: vestigial orgns’ inutility, and saw how it bolstered the theory of evolution….what do you do with new facts that eviscerate (pun intended) that view? Do you believe in science…or in ‘secular science’?
5. Immunologist William Parker at Duke University Medical Center said, “Maybe it’s time to correct the textbooks. Many biology texts today still refer to the appendix as a vestigial organ” (LiveScience, Aug. 24, 2009). He and his colleagues discovered that the appendix serves as a storehouse where good bacteria can lie in wait until they’re needed to repopulate the stomach after an episode of diarrhea or other intestine-emptying illness.
a. A separate recent study showed that the appendix conducts operations similar to those of the tonsils at the opposite end of the alimentary canal, which increase resistance to throat infections. (The tonsils, too, were long branded by evolutionists as useless and problematic.) A 2011 study showed that the appendix also helps generate, guide and train white blood cells, especially for fetuses and children. Valerie O’Loughlin, a professor of medical sciences at Indiana University, said it is “the site where a type of white blood cell called b-lymphocytes can be recognized and where the newborn and young child’s body can start to recognize certain pathogens that are in the [gastrointestinal] tract.”
b. Today, removal of a healthy appendix can be considered medical malpractice, Appendicitis Surgery and Malpractice
6. In 1994, however, renowned anatomy professor David Menton produced evidence disproving the idea that the coccyx is vestigial. “[M]ost modern biology textbooks give the erroneous impression that the human coccyx has no real function other than to remind us of the ‘inescapable fact’ of evolution,” Menton wrote in Essays on Origins.
7. By 1971, Encyclopedia Britannica labeled just over 100 human organs as vestigial. Research yielded more and more understanding about the importance of organs once called mere “accidents of nature.” One by one, they were proven to serve vital functions in the human body. For many biologists, Wiedersheim’s list—that once included over 180 vestigial organs—is now down to zero.
a. History is littered with body parts that were called "useless" simply because medical science had yet to understand them, Laitman (director of anatomy and functional morphology at New York City's Mount Sinai School of Medicine and president-elect of the American Association of Anatomists( said. Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
8. Again, the idea of vestigial organs lies at the heart of the evolutionary theory. As recently as 2004, prominent evolutionist Douglas Theobald said, “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” (29+ Evidences for Macroevolution).
9. The heart of the vestigial organ argument, then, is either an acknowledgment of ignorance (“I wasn’t able to discover the function”), or a scientifically flawed statement (“It has no function”). Observational or experimental science allows no place for such a statement.
10. It will be interesting to see what the believers in Darwinian evolution do with the above facts.
Source of the above: Evolution?s ?Unnecessary? Organs - theTrumpet.com
