No need for organs?

Discussion about scientific issues as they relate to God and Christianity including archaeology, origins of life, the universe, intelligent design, evolution, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
godslanguage
Senior Member
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 4:16 pm

No need for organs?

Post by godslanguage »

Are there any organs in the body that are useless as evolutionists claim. For one, evolutionists claim that the human appendix and other bodily organs are of no use and therefore, prove evolution.


Is'nt the appendix part of the digestive system? No need for it?
User avatar
BGoodForGoodSake
Ultimate Member
Posts: 2127
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:44 am
Christian: No
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: No need for organs?

Post by BGoodForGoodSake »

godslanguage wrote:Are there any organs in the body that are useless as evolutionists claim. For one, evolutionists claim that the human appendix and other bodily organs are of no use and therefore, prove evolution.


Is'nt the appendix part of the digestive system? No need for it?
It is not that the body has no use for this particular organ. However the layout of the human digestive system makes this particular organ vulnurable to infection which can lead to severe complications. In many other mammals his section of the gut is more developed as can be seen through comparative biology. It would appear that in humans that the appendix plays a very reduced role in the immune system. So much so to the point of it being virtually unnecessary.

Try looking for this book at your local library.
"Vertebrates" by Kardong 2nd ed.
It is not length of life, but depth of life. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
User avatar
godslanguage
Senior Member
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 4:16 pm

Re: No need for organs?

Post by godslanguage »

There are others that would say the appendix is a necessary part of the human body. I don't know that much about science/biology, except the electronics version, but, tell me if this is valid. If the appendix is part of the digestive system, and we digest food we are not naturally supposed to ingest. Lets, say, chemicals contained in food, genetically modified food etc...The appendix ofcourse would be a natural part of the human body treated unnaturally, and theforefore would cause abnormalities in the immune system or other parts in human biology. Just like the lungs, so if smoking causes cancer to the lungs and thus weakens your immune system, would'nt the lungs be useless just like the appendix would, even though the lungs are a natural part of the body. What I'm getting at is, since we are suffering from more diseases now than ever, are we considering that more and more of our internal/external body parts are of no use to us?
User avatar
BGoodForGoodSake
Ultimate Member
Posts: 2127
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:44 am
Christian: No
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: No need for organs?

Post by BGoodForGoodSake »

godslanguage wrote:There are others that would say the appendix is a necessary part of the human body. I don't know that much about science/biology, except the electronics version, but, tell me if this is valid. If the appendix is part of the digestive system, and we digest food we are not naturally supposed to ingest. Lets, say, chemicals contained in food, genetically modified food etc...The appendix ofcourse would be a natural part of the human body treated unnaturally, and theforefore would cause abnormalities in the immune system or other parts in human biology. Just like the lungs, so if smoking causes cancer to the lungs and thus weakens your immune system, would'nt the lungs be useless just like the appendix would, even though the lungs are a natural part of the body. What I'm getting at is, since we are suffering from more diseases now than ever, are we considering that more and more of our internal/external body parts are of no use to us?
Appendicitis can occur in otherwise healthy individuals. Unlike the lungs, removal of the appendix will not hinder a normal life. It's more like a ubiquitous birth defect than a vital organ like the lungs.
It is not length of life, but depth of life. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
User avatar
madscientist
Valued Member
Posts: 359
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 5:29 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: St Andrews, Fife, UK / Prievidza, Slovakia
Contact:

Appendix

Post by madscientist »

i've heard it is there because when people first ate more plants etc they needed it. But as time went on it was being used less and less and now it is also smaller than before. So it used to have a function. And, God made evolution so intelligent that because it is unnecessary now it is 'disappearing'.
Hope that answrs your question...
User avatar
BGoodForGoodSake
Ultimate Member
Posts: 2127
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:44 am
Christian: No
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: Appendix

Post by BGoodForGoodSake »

madscientist wrote:i've heard it is there because when people first ate more plants etc they needed it. But as time went on it was being used less and less and now it is also smaller than before. So it used to have a function. And, God made evolution so intelligent that because it is unnecessary now it is 'disappearing'.
Hope that answrs your question...
Well this is quite possible of course. But it's not as abstract as "evolution being intelligent" so something dissapears.

Imagine all of a sudden that the sun no longer gave off light or the rules of nature changed so that we could no longer detect light. We would no longer need eyes to see, the eyes become useless in this environment.

If you have a hereditary defect which would cause your vision to suffer you would never know. In this case you would pass your hereditary "defect" onto your children. Because of the lightless environment these sort of defects would accumulate and eventually lead to a blind population.
It is not length of life, but depth of life. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5310
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ottawa, ON Canada

Re: Appendix

Post by Canuckster1127 »

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
madscientist wrote:i've heard it is there because when people first ate more plants etc they needed it. But as time went on it was being used less and less and now it is also smaller than before. So it used to have a function. And, God made evolution so intelligent that because it is unnecessary now it is 'disappearing'.
Hope that answrs your question...
Well this is quite possible of course. But it's not as abstract as "evolution being intelligent" so something dissapears.

Imagine all of a sudden that the sun no longer gave off light or the rules of nature changed so that we could no longer detect light. We would no longer need eyes to see, the eyes become useless in this environment.

If you have a hereditary defect which would cause your vision to suffer you would never know. In this case you would pass your hereditary "defect" onto your children. Because of the lightless environment these sort of defects would accumulate and eventually lead to a blind population.
There's a really unfair political joke somewhere in the midst of this, but far be it from me to be the one to take the easy way out ..... ;)
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender
User avatar
godslanguage
Senior Member
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 4:16 pm

Re: Appendix

Post by godslanguage »

"Imagine all of a sudden that the sun no longer gave off light or the rules of nature changed so that we could no longer detect light. We would no longer need eyes to see, the eyes become useless in this environment. "

My understanding is that if the sun can no longer give off light, then no plants can grow and life on this planet would die off.
User avatar
BGoodForGoodSake
Ultimate Member
Posts: 2127
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:44 am
Christian: No
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: Appendix

Post by BGoodForGoodSake »

godslanguage wrote:"Imagine all of a sudden that the sun no longer gave off light or the rules of nature changed so that we could no longer detect light. We would no longer need eyes to see, the eyes become useless in this environment. "

My understanding is that if the sun can no longer give off light, then no plants can grow and life on this planet would die off.
It was for the sake of argument.

How about this imagine we had to go underground and were not afforded electricity nor fuels to provide illumination.

Better?
=D
It is not length of life, but depth of life. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
User avatar
godslanguage
Senior Member
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 4:16 pm

Re: Appendix

Post by godslanguage »

okay, thats better Bgood. LOL :D
User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5310
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ottawa, ON Canada

Re: Appendix

Post by Canuckster1127 »

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
godslanguage wrote:"Imagine all of a sudden that the sun no longer gave off light or the rules of nature changed so that we could no longer detect light. We would no longer need eyes to see, the eyes become useless in this environment. "

My understanding is that if the sun can no longer give off light, then no plants can grow and life on this planet would die off.
It was for the sake of argument.

How about this imagine we had to go underground and were not afforded electricity nor fuels to provide illumination.

Better?
=D
Another political joke ..... there's no end of them ..... ;)
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender
Post Reply