Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,214 Year: 5,471/9,624 Month: 496/323 Week: 136/204 Day: 6/4 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discussion on Creation article...
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 16 of 95 (324807)
06-22-2006 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by SR71
06-12-2006 11:47 AM


This is a very typical Creationism argument, in that it relies on the receiver being largely ignorant of general biology.
How did the gecko develop its outstanding ability to climb? Were the hairs on its toes useless up until the time they were just right? Why haven't a host of other lizards developed such a beneficial ability?
The hairs were not useless until they functioned as they do now. Salamander feet have what could be regarded as a simpler version of the gecko foot. They work by providing suction, gecko feet work by using the weak nuclear force but they also provide suction. Presumably the gecko ancestors slowly developed from using suction to using the weak nuclear force with an overlap in which they relied on both.
The third question is clearly from someone who has never observed lizards in their usual habitats. The answer is quite obvious - lizards don't lack in climbing ability, but they rely on claws and a slight roughness in the surfaces they are climbing. Providing they only need to climb such surfaces the geckos approach gives no advantage.
How did the bombardier beetle slowly evolve such a dangerous mechanism without obliterating itself into extinction? If the chemicals were not just the right strength or right ingredients, or if the control valve did not close when the explosion took place, think of the consequences. If the mechanism didn't work until fully formed, think of the extra baggage it would have been.
This is typical creationist mythology. I imagine the fact that Darwin got blasted by a Bombardier beetle adds to its appeal for them (he was collecting bombardier beetles and ran out of hands so held one between his teeth which promptly blasted him). Bombardier beetles blast is impressive, but it doesn't use unique materials to do so. The chemicals it uses occur in many other beetles, one as a metabolic by-product, the other as a noxious chemical to squirt over others. The "not fully formed" mechanism does work - we know this because there are actual living beetle that use it.
How did the hummingbird develop into such a high-metabolic bird? Why are there not many other birds similar to it? What fossils do we have that show its gradual development into what we know them as today?
Slowly. Their high metabolism is a product of several factors (size - smaller things have higher metabolism; diet - nectar is a very high energy food; habitat - nectar is highly available but difficult to collect). There aren't any birds similar to it, because there aren't any other habitats that offer such a high concentration of very high energy food in difficult to reach stationary containers.
Fossils? Come on. Everything we know about fossilisation should tell us that hummingbird fossils will be staggeringly rare - they have very small, delicate bones (which rarely fossilise) and they live in rain forests, which are extremely effective at destroying remains because they are wet and support a huge ecology of bacteria and fungi that eagerly destroys all trace of any carcass. And, finally, no-one has done much digging for fossils in rain forests.
How did the giraffe slowly develop such a brain structure that would allow it to raise and lower its head without any problems? If they are the result of millions of years of evolution, wherein they grew longer and longer necks overtime in order to eat from the trees, why aren't there hundreds of other animals with such necks?
By reinforcing and borrowing from existing structures, just like everything else evolves. Giraffes incidentally have a lovely example of evolution in the form of a nerve that runs all the way down their necks, only to come right back up again! Just as it does in all other mammals. They are not the only animals evolved to eat higher foliage, there are many monkeys, some apes, some birds, a lot of insects and, of course, elephants. The answer to the question is obvious, and two fold, it's not the only solution to the problem and giraffes have already filled the niche.
How did male seahorses ever evolve from non-pouch to pouch? Why would they ever develop a pouch in the first place? How did the eggs survive before the male ever developed a pouch, and who convinced the male to watch over the eggs once the pouch was developed?
This relies on ignorance; there are plenty of seahorse and sea dragons that use simpler methods than a pouch (simply gluing the eggs on in some cases, using a ridge in others). These clearly demonstrate the functionality of intermediate stages.
If the platypus developed from some type of rat millions of years ago, how did its fleshy snout develop into a leather bill? How did the electric sensors evolve where none existed before? And why do they lay eggs? Why don't many other mammals lay eggs?
"Some kind of rat"? They didn't. The monotremes are remarkable in that so few species of them remain. We can only presume that this is because they are out-competed my placental mammals in most cases (eggs are, after all, more vulnerable than foetuses). The "bill" of a platypus is nothing like the bill of a bird, but in fact much more like an extended and strengthened lip. It's not too difficult to imagine that extending and strengthening an ordinary lip would make it better for the purpose of rooting through mud. Indeed we also see enlarged lips on Manatee that do sometimes use a similar feeding method.
All animals are sensitive to electrical impulses (don't believe me? try rubbing yourself with an live electrical wire carrying a small current), the platypus simply extends this existing capability into a more useful means. Remember as well that water provides a much better medium to do this in than air.
Edited by Mr Jack, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SR71, posted 06-12-2006 11:47 AM SR71 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024