but a hope that one might be found.



What possible use could there be for the 'leg' bones inside some lizards that move like snakes? Or for some of the mammalian bones in whales, or the non-functioning 'eyes' of some cave creatures? Your hope is pretty hopeless here!



Laurie

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Vestigial, as I gave earlier, has a definition dependant on lack of knowing: a vestigial limb or organ is one that has no APPARENT use or functionality. That is, like the "vestigial" organ Tonsils (once considered such), it is simply not known what the actual use of the organ is, presently. Creationism does explain it, by saying there is a function, whether we know what it is or not.



Mike

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

The point is that evolution explains vestigial limbs and creationism does not.



Laurie

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

4. Vestigial limbs and organs. Evolution can explain this phenomenon beautifully.



This is a very dogmatic point of view. Sure, if we could see the progression (flow) that should and would exist right now, we could surmise that this was indeed a valid and viable solution to "not having to believe in a creator".



But we do not. So, what is a vestigial limb or organ? One that has no APPARENT use or functionality. Like, um, the tonsils were once considered useless and when a little irritated, doctors removed them by the scores. But ignorance of a fact, does not infer another fact. We now know that they are definitely a factor in our immune system, but many a child had their immune system crippled, before we bothered to look for a use.



We have to remember, an argument from ignorance is NO argument at all. Sorry.

With all due respect...

Mike

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

A VERY BRIEF SUMMARY

Some of the evidence for evolution:

1. Simpler fossils in the older rocks, more complex in older, and fossils develop in time order.

2. You would expect major changes in the environment to produce large scale extinctions. Fossil record confirms.

3. All mammals, for example, have the same basic bodily structure [bones and organs] but adapted to their environmental niche. Evolution explains.

4. Vestigial limbs and organs. Evolution can explain this phenomenon beautifully.

5. Different species in similar environments would evolve to be like each other. Australian animals do this.

6. Genetics explains how characteristics are passed on.

7. Microevolution certainly occurs. Macro has the same mechanisms.

8. The same species on different islands would evolve to fit the circumstances on the particular island. Exactly what Darwin found when he studied finches on the Galapagos Islands.

9. The are sequences of fossils that follow on from one another as you would expect. There are even 'links' between one species and another - but not very many see below.

10. Embryos have features that evolution explains well.



{One objection is that there are few 'link' fossils. The answer is that few animals produce fossils and, if speciation is a rapid process then there would be few such transitional animals anyway}



Problems with Creationism

1. Two accounts in Genesis.

2. Contradicts other scientific theories too. For example the moon and sun are made at the same time and before the stars.

3. Does not explain extinctions, vestigial limbs, why all mammals have same bone structure etc.





Summary

Any of the points above might be defended to some extent by Creationists BUT when you consider ALL the above together, an impartial person would have to conclude that the evidence for evolution is overwhelming.

Which is what 99.9% of scientists HAVE concluded and most Christians too -these latter taking Genesis to contain religious not scientific truths. To suggest that all these scientists are wrong/deluded/in Satan's power {ditto the Christians}or whatever is grossly implausible.



Best wishes



Laurie

Email: mgt.harris@btinternet.com