Common Ancestor or Common Designer?

Could the similarities in species reflect either a Common Ancestor or a Common Designer? Is there sufficient evidence to prove or disprove either theory?

Just how many ways are there to make an omelet that is edible?

__________________

Both positions use the same evidence, that current life forms share characteristics, and come to different conclusions.

The only way to 'attack' the idea of a common designer is to question his logic.

If we were the most bestest and beloved creation, why are squid's eyes better designed? Why are eagle's eyes more powerful? Why run a waste disposal pipe thru a recreation facility? Why do men have nipples? Why do our knowledge and wisdom increase thru maturity, while our ability to do anything about it decrease thru aging and withering? Why is youth wasted on the young? What is the point of senility? Wisdom Teeth: What the frell? Why are our canines so much larger than the rest of the teeth up front? The appendix: Why? Why do our teeth fall out just as we approach a decent understanding of the perfect way to barbeque a steak?
This isn't just questions that can be dealt with by stating that disease is caused by sin. If the body works perfectly, the wisdom teeth still poke up and hurt. Unless dental care is of the devil, and we're supposed to lose teeth to make room for new ones....

Now, it is possible that The Creator had a specific idea for each and every one of the sub-optimum characteristics, but until He does an interview, we have to either accept that Earth was a rush-job, or possibly it just 'happened.'

I'm sure there are plenty of people that want to attack common ancestry. Fire away.

__________________
Humble card-carrying member of the Clergy since 10 AUG 01.

Okay, just to advocate a little here are a few similar questions (to yours) from the other side of the fence:

1. The first cell capable of sexual reproduction reprduced with what? Did two cells dependent on sexual reproduction happen about at the same time...before the other died out?
2. How can recombining of the genetic code (mutations) create new and improved varieties of animals? Can I rearrange English letters to make Korean Hangul?
3. Why would animals want to reproduce since this would make it harder to survive? Does survival of the fittest mean survival of the species? Is that part of each animals thinking? To keep it's species alive even at the risk of it's own survival?
4. How many 'accidents' happened before symbiosis began to work properly...which was the brave (say bird for example) bird who finally decided he would go into the alligators mouth to clean it's teeth even though the alligator had already eaten all his bird brothers? How did the alligator figure out that the bird would be a good toothbrush?

Those are just a few advocate questions, thanks for kicking this conversation off to a good start elephant!

__________________

Actually, there are even more powerful ways to show that the evidence that works for evolution does not work for design (or at least not nearly as well).

For examples, please see the thread that Nick didn't respond to .

Throw in the evidence from biogeography (and paleobiogeography), and there isn't any room left for accepting design over evolution.

SCJ, just briefly, because all of this is just re-hash, and has been deconstructed better, elsewhere, multiple-times in the past...

A cell does not need another cell in order to reproduce sexually. Look up Meiosis in your first year Biology textbook.

This is just too deep a question to answer briefly. If you can't take our word for it that they do, just count the kinds and numbers of differences between humans and chimps. 98% of our DNA is identical, an accumulation of small differences in the DNA is all that accounts for the diffences between us and chimps. You can see that the differences in DNA could easily have occurred by mutations and recombinations over a fairly brief period of time in geological terms.

Humans are the only animals that we know for sure can think. Thinking has nothing to do with it. Behavior does. Behavior, controlled by physiological processes derives from the DNA. The survival of the genome is what is selected for. The survival of individuals is only selected for to the degree that it aids in the survival of the genome.

Probably not as many as you think. I'm not familiar with the evolutionary history of this bird, but I bet I get it right with my first guess: they are descended from birds that feed on the parasites of other reptiles and mammals, crawling along the skin. The alligators (and other critters that allow this behavior) are descended from the reptiles that allowed the birds to do their thing without interfering. It isn't a big jump from the back of an Alligator's head to its teeth - if it already wants you on the back of its head.

__________________
Man should no more get tired of using his brain--if he is using it properly--than a fish should get tired of water.

- Colin Wilson

The evidence can be construed to support design, just not intelligent design.

Think about that the next time you see someone choking on their food.

Common Designer for sure.

and think on this, you say an eagle's eyes are more powerful, and rightfuly so, but what use do you have for more powerful eyes? God designed the eagle's eyes because the eagle lives high off the ground, what need do you have for such vision? you dont need it, you may certainly want it but you dont have a need for it.

PHIL 4:19 But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

God gave you what you need, it may not be what you want or desire, but it meets your needs.

signs of a design not an accident? I think so.

__________________
Jon

"If your an idiot when God saves you, you're just a saved idiot thats all." JD Sumner

"Everyone has talents given to them from God, my talent just happens to be beating people up." Sugar Ray Leonard

Ignoring the misuse of the word "theory"...

It is not mere similarities that makes common descent so utterly convincing and it never has been. This is a creationist distraction.

It is the pattern of those similarities that is so convincing, a pattern that does not appear in items with a common designer.

Types of organisms form strict hierarchies which is something that designed objects do not do. That evolution demands this and creationism does not is telling. But more telling is that this leads to thousands of potential observations that would utterly disprove common descent. If next week a bat will full blown flight feather is discovered, evolution will be disproved.

Another mention is that not only do organism have features in common, they have errors in common as well. Humans cannot make vitamin C. But we do have the gene for for its synthesis and we would be able to make our own vitamin C if that gene was not crippled by a mutation. This is normally not lethal because humans have (and their ancestors had) normally access to foods with vitamin C. Closely related primates to humans also cannot make their own vitamin C. It was thus predicted, based on evolutionary principles, that their production of vitamin c would be broke in the same way as in humans. Afterwords when the work was done, it was found that that prediction was true. There are countless ways that the gene involved could have been deactivated. In this case a single nucleotide base (letter) of DNA was deleted. Since it takes three bases to code for an amino acid, the sequence was out of alignment and a non-functional protein is formed. Think of "THE DOG RAN" becoming "TED OGR ANE" Any one of hundreds of similar deletions would have done the same thing. And of course there are many other ways to destroy function as well. This sort of observation has been seen time and time again.

And how about cytochrome c similarities? We know that cytochrome cs are pretty much interchangable. A yeast with its cytochrome c removed and a human's inserted will function just fine. And yet the cytochrome cs are still around in an evolutionary pattern. It gets even worse. As I said, three bases code for a single amino acid. However there are usually more than one triplet that codes for a protein. These are functionally the same. And yet even they are arranged as evolution demands.

So on and so forth...

So you are saying that people NEED the ability to choke on their food while eating?

And here I thought it was just a poor design.

Creation and evolution are very delicate topics. There are ways to prove both and ways to disprove both. I personally go with the creationism approach for a few reasons.

I just took chemistry and I learned a very important topic, however since I can’t remember the name I’ll quick explain it =P. “Predicting what will happen when the current evidence suggests so”. Darwin took this law a little too far, when he was doing research on this topic of Evolution, he saw two birds (or whatever animal) that were of the same species and it was obvious that they were, same basic design. However one had some feature that the other did not. Microevolution this was called; “Two species differing in physical appearance or build, yet still of the same species”. He took this evidence and used it to create Macroevolution, which is what most people refer to as evolution; “The change of one species to another to fit the environment better”. But what he did was take about 2% of the change and estimated 100% of the change. That is a major problem, no one has found this evidence as of yet, and I will continue to wait until then. (lol just a little biology there )

Another thing I learned in chemistry, atoms, and their perfect design. Did you know that electrons swing on perfect balance with the atom that they are on? If they swing any farther, or nearer with their current energy state, the universe would disintegrate. Now I find winning the lottery hard, but doing this by chance is just so small, especially with a bang!

Elephant, you ask too much =P, but I will try to answer all those questions for ya.

1. “If we were the most bestest and beloved creation, why are squid's eyes better designed?” Were we created as the best in body or in mind? Can you prove that something else out on this earth right now, has a higher intelligence?
2. I think that last answer covers this question also: “Why are eagle's eyes more powerful?”
3. “Why run a waste disposal pipe thru a recreation facility?” Saves space. Makes for some fun playing spots (I would know I have been in that kind of a place before lol)
4. “Why do men have nipples?” Would you like to have nothing on your chest? I personally think they add flavor to mine. Think about it lol.
5. “Why do our knowledge and wisdom increase thru maturity, while our ability to do anything about it decrease thru aging and withering?” “All men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” We messed up, thus we brought upon ourselves this devastation. It’s a curse.
6. “Why is youth wasted on the young?” The answer above covers that.
7.“What is the point of senility?” Excuse me for not knowing that word. (I know I know my vocab s too small, I am working on fixing that.)
8. “Wisdom Teeth: What the frell?” I should be asking you that
9. “Why are our canines so much larger than the rest of the teeth up front?” That is design, as I am trying to prove by this message, they are larger so we may enjoy meat better, and eat easier.
10. “The appendix: Why?” Good question, don’t we all ask that?
11. “Why do our teeth fall out just as we approach a decent understanding of the perfect way to barbeque a steak?” *sigh* five answers that question well also.

Also I think that the earth was reduced to a “rush job” after the fall of man. If it happened by chance we have to come to terms with the questions I presented above. Those are hard questions to answer. Can the universe become perfect in some areas, while still not being perfect in others without design? Or was it by chance and our world is perfect in a few areas, and those just so happen to be the ones that we need to survive? Let me remind you Atom’s have yet to evolve, and if I prove my point, so do all creatures.


I am going to think about this topic more, I might have something to add later on.


-Fabier

__________________
Fight with your Heart and your destined for glory!
Fight without Honor and your destined to fall!