Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: ID defenders



Apparently, using the snail as a model, biologists have indeed
identified the evolutionary stages of eye development. See, for
example: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/3/part8.html

There are numerous other complex biological structures for which there
is good evolutionary evidence.

I disagree to some extent with those who say that ID theory cannot be
subjected to scientific tests. One of my favorite tests is to ask ID
supporters why human beings have an appendix. It performs no known
beneficial function in the human organism, and - indeed - it can put the
individual at risk for fatal infections. Why would an intelligent
designer include such and appendage in an efficiently designed digestive
tract?

On the other hand in some other mammals, the appendix does perform a
useful function in the digestions of food. The human appendix, however,
is a vestigial remnant of our evolution from a common ancestor with
other mammals. The function it performs is to remind us of whence we
came!

Dr. Mark H. Shapiro
Professor of Physics, Emeritus
California State University, Fullerton
Phone: 714 278-3884
FAX: 714 278-5810
email: mshapiro@fullerton.edu
web: http://chaos.fullerton.edu/Shapiro.html
travel and family pictures:
http://community.webshots.com/user/mhshapiro



-----Original Message-----
From: Forum for Physics Educators [mailto:PHYS-L@list1.ucc.nau.edu] On
Behalf Of R. McDermott
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 12:03 PM
To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
Subject: Re: ID defenders

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Whatcott" <betwys1@SBCGLOBAL.NET>
To: <PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: ID defenders


At 09:01 AM 8/25/2005, R McDermott, you wrote:
///
Their claim is that at least some of those changes occur by
means that evolution cannot account for

Well, I can't say I'm up on all the prevailing arguments, but I have
to
confess that I've NEVER heard that argument.

Let me float what may or may not be an Intelligent Design assertion
or two, to refresh you.
"Look at the splendor of the eye's design. How could that have
evolved - too complicated....?"

Not to nitpick, but have we observed an eyeless organism evolve an eye?