|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on May 23, 2020 13:36:50 GMT
Unlike the OP, as a Bronze Age thinker, I like science stuff quite a bit. I was making fun of the very scientific premise of: DERP! Whattabout the appendix? DERP! The OP has an issue with science but wants to argue about it the religious people. Makes sense in a religion hater sort way I guess, but he still should have checked his sources better. I found debate about it in 30 seconds or less. Isn't research a pillar of the scientific community or are assumptions just as good? So you were being sarcastic? In either case, I don't think it's fair to fault people for not being up-to-date on cases where science has recently corrected long-held common knowledge like the appendix being useless. OP is basically making the "argument from bad design," of which there is plenty in nature. They should be up to date before debating a topic. I would argue that a vestigal organ isn’t a sign of a bad design. It’s a sign of how versatile and/or consistent organic matter can be. |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on May 23, 2020 14:32:51 GMT
There are several vestigial organs in humans. Their existence is probably most inconvenient for those who claim mankind has never evolved from anything. It is also a question as to why God would design something which contains redundant elements, let alone (if we are really made in his own image) why a perfect God would ever need to have same. lets pretend there’s a certainty there is no piiroose [sic] for the appendix. So what? It may have had an original purpose or be an offshoot of a combination of something in all life. It would present no challenge to people who realize organic matter can be similar across millions of species without it being proof they were originally within the same species which would be silly. If the suggestion here is then that the same vestigial organs ought to be found independently across "millions" of different organisms, they just aren't and would be a silly argument to use against evolutionary theory. If you are saying that a lot of species show redundant features as such then well, yes: powerfully suggesting the mechanism of slow change. The suggestion that individual examples "may have had an original purpose or be an offshoot of a combination of something [else]" seems special pleading. The most obvious vestigial, and probably useless, structure specifically in the human body would be the plantaris tendon. In other apes and monkeys, this tendon enables the animal to clench its foot into a fist. In humans, the tendon is reduced, its place of attachment is highly variable, and obviously we can’t make fists of our feet. About one human in eight lacks a plantaris tendon entirely, suggesting that it is indeed useless. A better means to establish common descent would be that of genetic study. If one accepts that humans are the result of evolution rather than any 'design', then one must perforce agree with you, though it is easier to attribute vestigiality to just plain redundancy (although a vestigial organ might have lost its main function but remain functional in other ways) without adding other value judgements. If one implies design from a judgement of versatility and consistency, then one can also ask if redundancy is ever efficient design. If we are considering 'bad' design per se then we can take the cases of the human knee and eye, both examples for which human engineers can easily suggest better ways to go about things with the improved results in utility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on May 24, 2020 0:08:17 GMT
So you were being sarcastic? In either case, I don't think it's fair to fault people for not being up-to-date on cases where science has recently corrected long-held common knowledge like the appendix being useless. OP is basically making the "argument from bad design," of which there is plenty in nature. They should be up to date before debating a topic. I would argue that a vestigal organ isn’t a sign of a bad design. It’s a sign of how versatile and/or consistent organic matter can be. Sure, it's probably a good idea to at least look it up before posting about it, but it's not a big deal unless they pull an Arlon and keep insisting they're right and disregarding the science. It's not just vestigial organs, though. There are all kinds of "bad design" that doesn't make sense except via bi-products of evolution.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on May 24, 2020 9:40:57 GMT
Science? Some individuals maybe need to "get their act together then ask questions," but "science" is an approach to viewing the world and solving problems, which, among other things helped scientists who ask questions to discover that the appendix may have immunological benefits. And, fortunately, from that standpoint, it looks like the OP did have his act together. He asked a question.
Depending on what source one uses, vestigial has come to mean that much of the function, or at least the original function(s) of a given organ/adaptation is lost and/or that the current function is smaller/different than what it was thought to have been. Science is discovering that perhaps the appendix should not still be considered vestigial, however.
|
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on May 24, 2020 14:35:49 GMT
while you were sleeping
i may have to verify this
legally,
if
there is
such a thing any more.
is
parading around like an elitist whore
still
an east coast thing?
or
are all these karens
offspring
of
some secret government experiment
to see
just how far
the pendulum of ridiculous
can swing?
until
self-absorption brings
an implosion of the very same botox
chronically infecting
the brains
of
the karens surrounding me.
i imagine
time will tell if
there's
separate hand baskets
to hell.
seeings how
we all know to well
the room needed to transport
swollen heads
like these.
sjw 05/24/2020 inspired at this very moment in time by a symptom of a rabid disease brought to you by an american if you please.
from the 'beguiled series' of poems
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on May 24, 2020 16:44:48 GMT
If god 'created' us... What's the deal with the appendix? Actually a pretty valid question even IF one assumes the appendix serves a purpose. The following are functions the appendix ostensibly performs:
-It plays an important role in the fetus and young adults. At around 11th week of fetal development, the endocrine cells of the appendix produce biogenic amines and peptide hormones, which help with biological control mechanisms.
-Appendix function in the digestive system is to produce and protect beneficial probiotics in the gut. It acts as a reserve for good bacteria.
-Appendix functions as a lymphoid organ, which assist B lymphocyte maturation and aid in the production of immunoglobulin A antibodies.
-The appendix plays a vital role in the production of molecules, which helps direct the movement of lymphocytes to various parts of the body.
-The appendix improves the body’s physiologic immune response, especially in controlling food, drug, and microbial antigens.
Why would the body of a designed human need to be immune from anything in a world that was designed by a caring God? Even the role it serves in fetuses and young adults could either have been done somewhere else OR at least the appendix could have been designed to automatically disappear once its function is no longer needed. THEN people wouldn't suffer from various ailments associated with the appendix. OR better yet, simply design the appendix so it would not become infected.
|
|
