You do realise that the route of the laryngeal nerve in the giraffe suggests evolution rather than design. If it was designed, the designer was incompetent.
Suggests? Why do you make that philosophical argument?
No. The route has a purpose. That's how design works.
For example, it may look stupid to a person, why something is made or done a certain way, but when one realizes the reason for the function, that understanding should help them to be reasonable. Not unrealistically make ridiculous arguments.
To illustrate, the water cycle has a purpose.
Yes, the water runs down mountains amd takes long routes to oceans and form lakes, but they serve very important, and useful purposes.
In fact, if there was no water cycle, life would quickly be reduced.
Similarly, the laryngeal nerve which are really two, are designed to source organs along its route. They have a purpose, and a goal.
You dismissed the scientific consensus on the laryngeal nerve suggesting evolution, and then presented a scientific description of the laryngeal nerve as support for your argument.
In other words "you can't trust science, look at this science"
I'm sorry, but please don't make such incorrect statements (putting it mildly) for the sake of argument.
There is no scientific consensus for philosophical arguments put forth by Dawkins and other Atheists.
The laryngeal nerve performs useful function to the body, which explains its route. That's the only consensus, and it is a direct observable fact. No sane person denies that. I don't.
However, your ridiculous argument is not a scientific consensus. Science does not do Creation Evolution arguments. Atheists do.
I hope you are not another scientist, because such ridiculous arguments do not do the scientific community any justice.
Of course no. Because it doesn't.
However, you presented it as an argument against it being a result of evolution, so you need to explain it. If you have no explanation, what was the point in presenting it?
It's like you are on trial for murder and to counter the prosecution's evidence of the bloody knife with your fingerprints on, you claim the same knife shows you can't be the murderer. It makes literally no sense.
Wait. Did you ask...
BTW, can you explain why the info you posted refutes the claim that the route of the laryngeal nerve is evidence for evolution and against ID?
Perhaps you need to rewrite that, because, right now, it asked why what I posted is against ID, and I did not post anything against ID, so I cannot answer that, and If you can't, I don't know what more to say.
Yup.
Are you?
That explanation makes no sense in the context of intelligent design, but it makes sense in an evolutionary context.
Then perhaps you don't understand what we are discussing. We are discussing the laryngeal nerve.
There are some educational courses on the laryngeal nerve, that can help with learning its purpose.
I'll suggest the same I did to
@viole. Also, these ridiculous Atheistic arguments will get us nowhere other than an endless argument.
So since
we know the laryngeal nerve has a purpose, which requires its route, there is no need for me to continue listening to your philosophy.
Here you go.
Done.
Using your analogy, your house is designed with a door that opens onto a brick wall. Why would an architect do that?
What? No that's not the case, but even if it were. There would be a reasonable explanation - like the wall was built on the other side of the door, before the door was removed, which it will be, as it serves no purpose.
Since no sane doctor has seen the need to perform surgery to shorten the laryngeal nerve or remove it, we know it is serving its purpose.
Surgeons operate to correct things that are useless, and problematic.
We don't find that to be the case with the laryngeal nerve. Do we?
You clearly have no idea how evolution works, so why make yourself look foolish by advertising that fact?
The usual Atheists ad hominem.
They never fail to throw it in Lol.
When they talk to a scientist, they say the same thing, to their embarrassment. Lol.
James Tour and the other thousands of scientists laughs at them.
No one cares about your ad hominem, in case you don't know, and think they have some effect. All they do is show up more clearly the Atheists' inability to engage in a reasonable discussion.
So if you want to see what looks foolish....
No they don't. Someone has been telling you porkies.
If one buries their head in the sand, it would be impossible to see what they hide their senses from.
It'll take me some time, but I can get those references for you.
In the meantime, here are some references you can consider, showing that not all scientist are in agreement on these matters.
The Idea That a Scientific Theory Can Be ‘Falsified’ Is a Myth
...some scientists have disparaged the entire field of science studies, claiming that it was
undermining public confidence in science by denying that scientific theories were objectively true.
“The Scientific Method” as Myth and Ideal
No. There is just science. What you call "science" is simply science that contradicts your version of ancient superstition. It is still science though, whether you like it or not.
Not according to many scientists.
https://iai.tv/video/missing-evidence
Yes. I know, that some like to hide their head in the sand, when it comes to protecting their Atheistic views, but I think when we acknowledge things that are true, it allows us to move forward in reasonable discussions, rather than, stating closed minded views.
Are you denying that there is bad science, and or ideas and conjecture presented as science?
Preceeding your comments with a yes or no, would be helpful.
Getting back to design though.
We know that random processes do not need to be specific, nor goal driven.
For example, during the water cycle, the rain and snow falls, but the path the water takes is random, as it carves out "valleys" which can take many different paths. Randomly.
However, if you were to alter the design of many things, life would not exist, and this is a fact, from the beginning of the universe - the so-called Big Bang, to our amazing bodies.
So we have strong evidence, and facts that there is a designer.
You are free to deny that, until death.
, but I think that's the final nail in the coffin.
Pun intended.