Is the vestigial organ argument a vestige of poor science

[whirlingmerc]

Once upon a time the human body was full of so called vestigial organs. Now? arguably zero.

We were taught in school that there is a list of many vestigial organs and this is consistent with evolution and yet... that prediction of evolutionary science appears wrong and there are arguably no vestigial organs

for example:
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090730-spleen-vestigial-organs_2.html
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
Maggie Koerth-Baker
for National Geographic News
July 30, 2009
Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless.

But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

 

[ChristineM]

Science is a developing subject learning from knowledge gained from experimentation and observation. So no, the discovery by science of the uses of these organs is actually a proof that science is working

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Poor science continues to be the exclamation we are made from some guy made of dirt.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Poor science continues to be the exclamation we are made from some guy made of dirt.

I was made to work in a garden not a jungle

 

[Revoltingest]

Science is a developing subject learning from knowledge gained from experimentation and observation. So no, the discovery by science of the uses of these organs is actually a proof that science is working

Science & religion take opposite paths.

Science....
It starts with no information. It begins slowly, making observations & theories.
It tests theories, makes new observations, discovers what is wrong, & revises them.
The understanding continually improves, becoming ever more useful.

Religion....
It starts with scripture giving perfect information about the natural & supernatural worlds.
Sundry groups each read it differently, then making prescriptions & proscriptions.
They descend into differing factions with each claiming to have The Truth.

It's not possible for all of them to be right, so one might think this means most are wrong.
But it's worse than that....they're all not even wrong.

 

[Quintessence]

Science & religion take opposite paths.

Science....
It starts with no information. It begins slowly, making observations & theories.
It tests theories, makes new observations, discovers what is wrong, & revises them.
The understanding continually improves, becoming ever more useful.

Religion....
It starts with scripture giving perfect information about the natural & supernatural worlds.
Sundry groups each read it differently, then making prescriptions & proscriptions.
They descend into differing factions with each claiming to have The Truth.

That's an odd characterization. Who taught you that? There's definitely no point when I was a working scientist where I started with "no information" and no point in my religion where I started with "scripture giving perfect information."

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Once upon a time the human body was full of so called vestigial organs. Now? arguably zero.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090730-spleen-vestigial-organs_2.html
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
Maggie Koerth-Baker
for National Geographic News
July 30, 2009
Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless.

But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

Yes, science marches on in its relentless and remarkably successful campaign to understand the workings of nature.

Incidentally, vestigial doesn't necessarily mean useless or functionless, nor is the topic confined to human anatomy (see below). A vestigial organ may have a function as it evolves away as long as that function is not conferring a competitive advantage. Ancestral forms may have benefited from a certain anatomical innovation that is no longer relevant to the modern descendant's life, and may even be costing it if the resources committed to the growth and maintenance of the organ exceed benefit it confers:

"Pythons and boa constrictors have tiny hind leg bones buried in muscles toward their tail ends. Such features, either useless or poorly suited to performing specific tasks, are described as vestigial. They are also intriguing evidence of the evolutionary histories of species.Vestigial legs are a clue that snakes descended from lizards. Over 100 million years ago, some lizards happened to be born with smaller legs, which, in certain environments, helped them move about unencumbered. As generation after generation survived and reproduced, this new form flourished. Over time, all members of the group were born with shorter legs, and eventually with no legs at all. Almost. The ancestor of boas and pythons retained very small vestigial legs, a trait passed on to its descendants"

Also:

"Cave-dwelling tetra fish (Astyanax mexicanus) are blind; they have small vestigial eyes that do not work. Then why have them at all? Biologists have long struggled to explain how natural selection could fully account for such degenerations, and recently they have found another possible answer: Genetic mutations that hamper eye development also may increase the number of taste buds. Thus, mutations that happened to give the fish an advantage in tasting and smelling--a huge benefit in a dark environment--might also have inadvertently, and harmlessly, caused the degeneration of their eyes."

source
​

 

[exchemist]

Once upon a time the human body was full of so called vestigial organs. Now? arguably zero.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090730-spleen-vestigial-organs_2.html
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
Maggie Koerth-Baker
for National Geographic News
July 30, 2009
Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless.

But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

What is the "vestigial organ argument", please? I have never heard of it. Can you quote some references, or provide some links, for me to read what it is?

 

[shunyadragon]

Once upon a time the human body was full of so called vestigial organs. Now? arguably zero.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090730-spleen-vestigial-organs_2.html
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
Maggie Koerth-Baker
for National Geographic News
July 30, 2009
Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless.

But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

Once upon a time the human body was full of so called vestigial organs. Now? arguably zero.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090730-spleen-vestigial-organs_2.html
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
Maggie Koerth-Baker
for National Geographic News
July 30, 2009
Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless.

But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

I am not sure where you are going with this. This research actually supports the science of evolution.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's an odd characterization.

Thank you.

Who taught you that?

No one.
It's just an observation about the religiontific vs the scientific method.
Perhaps you remember that old thread, eh.

There's definitely no point when I was a working scientist where I started with "no information" and no point in my religion where I started with "scripture giving perfect information."

I spoke of the dawning of science, even before it was named as such.
And it's just a broadly brushed generalization about only some religions,
eg, those who see their scripture as the inerrant word of a perfect all
powerful deity. My post doesn't apply to those for whom it doesn't apply.

 

[osgart]

You can use religion as a hypothesis, but often times you cant test a bit of it.

 

[David T]

Poor science continues to be the exclamation we are made from some guy made of dirt.

Dumber than dirt don't forget that part. But if we have 2 infinitely large egos standing outside reality, arguing, which ego is correct? Science nor religion is immune from ego abuse!!!!

I start sounding like a native american "uggggh smart people dumb, we dumb folk way smarter because we know we dumb. They only know they smart".

Tic tock the population grows by 200, 000 a day. Are there not enough of us yet? No it's intelligent design vs random accidental that's important stuff just ignore that NUMBER, science will save us and jesus is returning any day...

Normal is mad!

 

[David T]

I was made to work in a garden not a jungle

well being a Persian cat certainly doesn't make you a lion.

Lions are dangerous and so is nature.

 

[David T]

Thank you.

No one.
It's just an observation about the religiontific vs the scientific method.
Perhaps you remember that old thread, eh.

I spoke of the dawning of science, even before it was named as such.
And it's just a broadly brushed generalization about only some religions,
eg, those who see their scripture as the inerrant word of a perfect all
powerful deity. My post doesn't apply to those for whom it doesn't apply.

The text is literary

Science & religion take opposite paths.

Science....
It starts with no information. It begins slowly, making observations & theories.
It tests theories, makes new observations, discovers what is wrong, & revises them.
The understanding continually improves, becoming ever more useful.

Religion....
It starts with scripture giving perfect information about the natural & supernatural worlds.
Sundry groups each read it differently, then making prescriptions & proscriptions.
They descend into differing factions with each claiming to have The Truth.

It's not possible for all of them to be right, so one might think this means most are wrong.
But it's worse than that....they're all not even wrong.

Why do "you people" *, insist religion understands its own texts? What evidence there is zero evidence. So "you people" *, say what religion is as if it's got some clue when 100%of the evidence points in the opposite direction. Hell they even argue that constantly inside religion itself. *they point to each other and proclaim "heretic" which literally means you do not understand the text! !!


*Disclaimer to reduce pantie in bunch effect term is used only in laughing beer swilling good humor kind of way. Not intended to be literally offensive. I find the term funny and accurate about you people.

 

[David T]

You can use religion as a hypothesis, but often times you cant test a bit of it.

Thomas said the exact same Thing curiously!

 

[osgart]

Thomas said the exact same Thing curiously!

Hmm. Well than we will have to prove the spiritual with the spiritual.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Once upon a time the human body was full of so called vestigial organs. Now? arguably zero.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090730-spleen-vestigial-organs_2.html
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
Maggie Koerth-Baker
for National Geographic News
July 30, 2009
Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless.

But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

Nice strawman. I should have predicted it. You used the bogus Junk DNA argument and now you are using the bogus vestigial organ argument.

A vestigial organ is not a useless organ. A vestigial organ is an organ that does not have its original use. For example lungs evolved in fishes long before they began to venture on land. The aided the gills in obtaining oxygen. In the line that led to us they became the sole source of oxygen. In other fish they evolved into the swim bladder. Not all fishes have swim bladders, those that do have "vestigial lungs". That does not mean that the swim bladder is not functional. Fish that have them would die rather quickly if they were forced to swim all of the time.

http://homolog.us/blogs/ncrna/2015/01/27/evolution-of-lungs/

In other words when one states the obvious, that vestigial organs are not useless, one is supporting the theory of evolution.

 

[David T]

Hmm. Well than we will have to prove the spiritual with the spiritual.

LOL I simply call that breathing which seems to some forgotten experienced phenomena around here!

"I believe breathing is created with intelligent design!" "no no no breathing is a random mutation due to survival of the fittest genetically due to random mutation of adapatability its self evident. Without it you would die".

 

[osgart]

LOL I simply call that breathing which seems to some forgotten experienced phenomena around here!

"I believe breathing is created with intelligent design!" "no no no breathing is a random mutation due to survival of the fittest genetically due to random mutation of adapatability its self evident. Without it you would die".

I suppose love, and hate are random mutations as well, perhaps those qualities are built in us so that we can have outdoor bbq's with friends. I love brisket.

 

[David T]

I suppose love, and hate are random mutations as well, perhaps those qualities are built in us so that we can have outdoor bbq's with friends. I love brisket.

Exactly!!!! Sometimes life just experienced is the best. I find humor the best way to knock off the thinking!!! Which BTW kierkegaard said life is a something to be experienced not explained. Of course he did a lot of explaining what that meant.