Why can't dog have six legs?

[In situ]

Why can a fork designed "according to a common plan" have, three, four or five "teeth", while dogs only have four legs? Some creatures such as insects have six legs, but dogs does not. Why is that?

If I am to take Gary Parker's words in his article in Answer in Genesis for serious, I cannot see how his suggested "creation according to a common plan" would prevent dogs from having six legs. So why do we not see, not even in the fossil record, any dogs with six legs?

I been told by creationists that life is diverse because the creator loves diversity, so why did not the creator create 6-legged dogs? Was the creator somehow prevented to make dogs with six legs?

 

[Ken Behrens]

Let me suggest that earth did in fact bring forth such critters, and they did not live to create offspring. The skeleton was unsuitable, as mammal diversification requires ability to separate upper and lower body movements. Such insects use all their legs together, on each side, and they do not have an internal skeleton, which is how the legs can move together. The requirement that larger creatures be able to find larger amounts of food demanded that the limbs be able to perform more than one function (like running after it, and then holding it for the teeth.)

Whether you believe in evolution or creation, you must believe that any creature that is not fit to survive, dies. The difference is whether such creatures happened because of God's command, or at random.

 

[JCFantasy23]

MOD HAT ON

This Thread Has Been Moved

We are moving this thread to a section where it is a better fit.

Please continue the discussion here, thank you.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Let me suggest that earth did in fact bring forth such critters, and they did not live to create offspring. The skeleton was unsuitable, as mammal diversification requires ability to separate upper and lower body movements. Such insects use all their legs together, on each side, and they do not have an internal skeleton, which is how the legs can move together. The requirement that larger creatures be able to find larger amounts of food demanded that the limbs be able to perform more than one function (like running after it, and then holding it for the teeth.)

Whether you believe in evolution or creation, you must believe that any creature that is not fit to survive, dies.

You are deriving all this from existing creatures as we know them.
Are you saying that this all-powerfull god couldn't create a dog with 6 legs and design its anatomical structure in such a way that it would in fact be ultra fit for the environment it is dumped in?

Somehow, that kind of puts "all powerfull" and "all knowing" into perspective, doesn't it?

The difference is whether such creatures happened because of God's command, or at random.

Evolution isn't random.

 

[Ken Behrens]

You are deriving all this from existing creatures as we know them.
Are you saying that this all-powerfull god couldn't create a dog with 6 legs and design its anatomical structure in such a way that it would in fact be ultra fit for the environment it is dumped in?

Somehow, that kind of puts "all powerfull" and "all knowing" into perspective, doesn't it?



Evolution isn't random.

Read it again. God told the earth to bring forth the critters. He did not create them Himself. That's why the limitations are in place.

Evolution is random for some theorists. If it is not random for you, then what
was the cause of the non-randomness?

 

[juvenissun]

Why can a fork designed "according to a common plan" have, three, four or five "teeth", while dogs only have four legs? Some creatures such as insects have six legs, but dogs does not. Why is that?

View attachment 184152​

If I am to take Gary Parker's words in his article in Answer in Genesis for serious, I cannot see how his suggested "creation according to a common plan" would prevent dogs from having six legs. So why do we not see, not even in the fossil record, any dogs with six legs?

I been told by creationists that life is diverse because the creator loves diversity, so why did not the creator create 6-legged dogs? Was the creator somehow prevented to make dogs with six legs?

No idea. God does not create dog that way.
You may ask this question to evolutionist. I bet that their answer would be very profound, but also more ridiculous.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

No idea. God does not create dog that way.
You may ask this question to evolutionist. I bet that their answer would be very profound, but also more ridiculous.

The evolutionists' answer is quite simple and based on actual data. Dogs don't have six legs because their ancestors didn't have six legs. We can only really speculate as to why that is the case, but we have supporting evidence for that, too (selection). Of course the details of it all are more nuanced, but it's really that simple.

That's what the data tells us. Anything else in the form of purpose, intention, intelligent designers or whatever else one might dream of is added without basis in evidence and as a result of biases and errors in logic and reasoning.

 

[juvenissun]

The evolutionists' answer is quite simple and based on actual data. Dogs don't have six legs because their ancestors didn't have six legs. We can only really speculate as to why that is the case, but we have supporting evidence for that, too (selection). Of course the details of it all are more nuanced, but it's really that simple.

Yes, you can only speculate.
Creationists don't have to.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Read it again. God told the earth to bring forth the critters. He did not create them Himself. That's why the limitations are in place.

Ow, okay... So you accept evolution then? Or at least some theistic morf of it?

Evolution is random for some theorists.

I don't care what these unnamed "some theorists" have to say. Evolution is not random.

If it is not random for you

"I" have nothing to do with it.
Evolution simply is not a random process, regardless of what "some theorists" say or what I feel about it.

, then what
was the cause of the non-randomness?

Natural selection.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No idea. God does not create dog that way.
You may ask this question to evolutionist. I bet that their answer would be very profound, but also more ridiculous.

More ridiculous then shrugging your shoulders and release upon the world the intellectually lazy "well... that's just how the designer made it"?

I somehow doubt that.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes, you can only speculate.
Creationists don't have to.

Indeed. All creationists have to do is shrug their shoulders and say "ma' god dun it".

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Yes, you can only speculate.
Creationists don't have to.

Yes, yes, of course. Atum created the world by.. err... well.... let's just say he probably used his right hand.

No, no it was Kaang, the shape-shifter. Or was it Xolas. Or was it Amenominakanushi, Taka-mi-musuhi-no-kami and Kami-musuhi-no-kami? Purusha? Eurynome?

Meh. One of those any way. The data doesn't really say either way, which is exactly what I said. Anything else is speculation.

 

[Kenny'sID]

No idea. God does not create dog that way.
You may ask this question to evolutionist. I bet that their answer would be very profound, but also more ridiculous.

Not to mention, long winded.

So why do we not see, not even in the fossil record, any dogs with six legs?

As mentioned, God chose not to make six legged dogs...just that simple. You might as well name off every conceivable configuration for an animal, and ask why didn't God do it that way? See how silly the question is now?

Atheists say the darnedest things.

 

[HitchSlap]

Not to mention, long winded.

I suppose anything is "long winded," compared to "goddidit."

As mentioned, God chose not to make six legged dogs...just that simple. You might as well name off every conceivable configuration for an animal,

Including the duck billed platypus, no doubt.

and ask why didn't God do it that way? See how silly the question is now?

You're right, a much better question might be, why did god do it this way.
i.e. the eye, male nipples, upright human gait on a frame built for quadrapeds, etc...

Atheists say the darnedest things.

Reality can often sound funny if you're not used to hearing it.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Including the duck billed platypus, no doubt.

you may include that in all the possible configurations if you like. Your point?

You're right, a much better question might be, why did god do it this way.
i.e. the eye, male nipples, upright human gait on a frame built for quadrapeds, etc...

Built for quadrupeds? Can't wait to hear that explanation and who confirmed it as a fact.

Reality can often sound funny if you're not used to hearing it.

Again, your point?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Built for quadrupeds? Can't wait to hear that explanation and who confirmed it as a fact.

Notice the S-like shape? That is the single most important cause of lower backpains which over 70% of humans will have to deal with at some point in their lives.

Reason being that this spine evolved to walk on all 4s, not for bipedalism. It had to be "adapted" little by little to get to this S-like shape, so that we could hold our head up and walk upright.

This is not a spine fit for bipedalism. It is a spine fit for quadrupeds.

 

[Ken Behrens]

Ow, okay... So you accept evolution then? Or at least some theistic morf of it?

I don't know if I'd call what I believe a theistic morph or not. I believe God caused the earth to create animals (since that is literally what the Bible says). I believe in natural selection from then on. I also believe that Adam named some animals in a way that they are no longer on the limited earth that we have chosen to perceive since the fall.

I can prove both of these by the way, as it is known that many species have become obsolete in the past century due to man's increasing abuse of the environment. I have also studied cryptozoology, and I know that unknown animals seem to "drop in" to the perceived world from time to time.

 

[-57]

Evolution isn't random.

Are you suggesting that a mutation knows what base pair to occur in?

 

[-57]

As mentioned, God chose not to make six legged dogs...just that simple. You might as well name off every conceivable configuration for an animal, and ask why didn't God do it that way? See how silly the question is now?

Atheists say the darnedest things.

Excellent point.

 

[Speedwell]

Are you suggesting that a mutation knows what base pair to occur in?

The non-random part of the process is natural selection.