Difference between revisions of "Vestigial structures"
TheLoneOne (Talk | contribs) |
(Undo revision 526049 by TheLoneOne (Talk) - citation is given in that sentence) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
This is not a scientific argument, but a [[theology|theological]] argument.<ref>Doyle, 2008</ref> | This is not a scientific argument, but a [[theology|theological]] argument.<ref>Doyle, 2008</ref> | ||
| − | Also, the list of supposedly vestigial organs in humans has gone from 180 in 1890 to none in 1999<ref name="JB2000" />, as functions have been found for such organs | + | Also, the list of supposedly vestigial organs in humans has gone from 180 in 1890 to none in 1999<ref name="JB2000" />, as functions have been found for such organs. |
== Functional "vestigial" organs == | == Functional "vestigial" organs == | ||
Revision as of 02:16, September 30, 2008
Vestigial structures are structures or organs that have been claimed by evolutionists as evolutionary "leftovers", that are no longer functional, and this has been used as evidence for evolution, as God would not have created useless structures and organs.[1]
This is not a scientific argument, but a theological argument.[2] Also, the list of supposedly vestigial organs in humans has gone from 180 in 1890 to none in 1999[1], as functions have been found for such organs.
Contents
Functional "vestigial" organs
Some of the organs previously thought to be vestigial have important functions. Jerry Bergman wrote:[1]
Few examples of vestigial organs in humans are now offered, and the ones that are have been shown by more recent research to be completely functional (and in many cases critically so, see Bergman and Howe)...
One popular book on the human body which discussed vestigial organs stated that next to circumcision‘… tonsillectomy is the most frequently performed piece of surgery. Doctors once thought tonsils were simply useless evolutionary leftovers and took them out thinking that it could do no harm. Today there is considerable evidence that there are more troubles in the upper respiratory tract after tonsil removal than before, and doctors generally agree that simple enlargement of tonsils is hardly an indication for surgery...’
Loss of function does not prove evolution
Evolutionist claim that snakes have vestigial features.[3] According to the science magazine New Scientist:
Scientists have found fossils of a legged snake with “hips” – a specimen that could be the most primitive snake ever unearthed. The find suggests early snakes were not creatures of the sea and has reignited the debate over how snakes evolved.
Sebastián Apesteguía at the Argentine Museum of Natural History and his team found the snake fossil in a terrestrial deposit in the Río Negro province of north Patagonia, Argentina, in 2003. Unlike a handful of legged fossils found in marine deposits and identified as snakes over the past decade, the new fossil, named Najash rionegrina, has a well-defined sacrum supporting a pelvis and functional hind legs outside of its ribcage.[4]
Creation scientists dispute that snakes with legs are evidence for the theory of evolution:
Even assuming it could be established that the ancestor of snakes today had legs, creationists have no problem in principle with loss of features through natural processes. Development of leglessness is not evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, which requires addition of new genetic information. Loss of legs could be achieved through degeneration of the DNA information sequences that specify leg development.[5]
Different views
In the view of secular evolutionists, vestigial structures are some of the best evidence in favor of evolution and against intelligent design because the most parsimonious explanation for these structures' existence is that they were once functional in progenitor species, but were rendered useless by evolution. According to Occam's Razor, all other things being equal, the solution that makes the fewest assumptions is the best.
However, this argument ignores the counter argument of the fall, where it is understood that current conditions are not the way God originally designed, and that vestigial structures are, if anything, evidence for devolution, not evolution.[6]
Furthermore, the fact that science has not determined the function of a particular structure does not mean that the structure has no function. Indeed, as stated earlier evolutionists have in the past proposed 180 human organs as being vestigial, but we now know that the vast majority of those organs have since been found to have definite functions,[1] including the tonsils, thymus, and the pineal gland. The tonsils were found to help fight infection, and the thymus and pineal gland were both found to secrete important hormones.[7]. In addition, a number of suggestions and claims have been made about the role of the human appendix.[8]
Sources
- Anon., Snakes with legs? A preliminary reply, 20th March 2000.
- Anon., Scientists may have found appendix’s purpose, MSNBC, 5th October, 2007.
- Associated Press, Purpose of appendix believed found, 2007.
- Batten, Don, and Sarfati, John, ‘Vestigial’ Organs: What do they prove? (Creation Ministries International).
- Bergman, Jerry, "Do any vestigial organs exist in humans?", Journal of Creation 14(2):95–98, August 2000. HTML, PDF.
- Darwinism Refuted.com, The Myth of Vestigial Organs.
- Doyle, Shaun, Vestigial arguments: remnants of evolution, 11th June 2008 (Creation Ministries International)
- Glover, Warwick, The human vermiform appendix Journal of Creation 3(1):31–38, April 1988.
- Ham, Ken, and Wieland, Carl, Your appendix ... it’s there for a reason, Creation 20(1):41–42, December 1997.
- New Scientist Oldest snake fossil shows a bit of leg, 19th April, 2006
- Wilkinson, Richard, Cutting out a useless vestigial argument, Creation 26(3):51, June 2004.
- Wieland, Carl, and Doyle, Shaun, More musings on our ‘useless’ appendix, May 2008 (Creation Ministries International).
- Zimmer, Carl, How the snake lost its legs: Snakes, researchers once thought, descended from humble burrowing lizards. New evidence suggests a marine pedigree, and a family tree that includes 45-foot reptiles, Discover, July 1997.
