Creationists cant answer....

[Naraoia]

narioa and Steezie
You both seem incredulous that women are separate and unique in having pain at childbirth and animals not.
Its true.
Women because of the shape of thier body and the childs size produce a unique and long episode of pain at that time.
Female animals do not have the pain because of the shape of animals bodies.
Evolution admits to this and says its because of humans walking upright.
It isn't.

I can turn around your "argument" and argue the exact opposite: female animals also have pain at childbirth because of the shape of their bodies and the child's size. Anyone can say something that sounds profound but has no content. Care to bring up examples? Or say a word or two on spotted hyaenas?

Now it may be true that humans have more difficulty giving birth than most mammals, because human infants have absolutely huge and absolutely silly-shaped heads. I don't know, not my area.

 

[LittleNipper]

The tailbone is evolving to help us fight Invisible Pink Unicorns from Omicron Persei VIII. I'm just providing you with a possibility. Do the study and prove me wrong.

Or, alternatively, look up the concept of "burden of proof".

I was not the one who made up his/her mind that there are parts of the body that have no value but prove evolution....

 

[Vene]

I was not the one who made up his/her mind that there are parts of the body that have no value but prove evolution....

So, what's the cecum do? What use is the plantaris muscle, one that doesn't even is exist in 9% of the population? For some reason, I'm under the impression that when people don't even notice that they are missing a muscle that other people have that the muscle is useless.

 

[MasterOfKrikkit]

simply "whales" living in different lifestyles.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. (But, then, how would they reproduce -- I guess they'd have to adopt.)

You must admit yourself these fossils would be evidence thatthese whales were living lives fine in the way they wee.

If I was a whale, I wouldn't be fine with the way they wee -- right into the same water you eat in?... yecch.

The true whales would of been around while these so called transitional ones were.

No True Scotsman fallacy: it's not just for humans any more.

 

[MasterOfKrikkit]

I was not the one who made up his/her mind that there are parts of the body that have no value but prove evolution....

No, because that would require understanding how science works. I notice that you're conveniently ignoring the small detail that the tailbone (eg) does serve a useful purpose in closely related animals that have tails. That being part of why the whole vestigial organs thing is such a nice piece of evidence in favor of evolution.

 

[Loudmouth]

I was not the one who made up his/her mind that there are parts of the body that have no value but prove evolution....

There are parts of the body which have rudimentary functions compared to the same part in other animals. This is a fact. There is no way around it.

If evolution is true, then such features should reflect past adaptations that are no longer needed in the current niche. This is exactly what we observe. The human lineage has moved away from an herbivorous diet which means they no longer need a caecum. The presence of a degenerate caecum (the human vermiform appendix) is a vestige of our lineages past adaptations.

So how do creationists explain the presence of a rudimentary caecum? Do we find a rudimentary throttle stick on modern cars just because early cars had them? Nope. Hanging on to rudimentary functions is not what intelligent designers do.

 

[RobertByers]

I can turn around your "argument" and argue the exact opposite: female animals also have pain at childbirth because of the shape of their bodies and the child's size. Anyone can say something that sounds profound but has no content. Care to bring up examples? Or say a word or two on spotted hyaenas?

Now it may be true that humans have more difficulty giving birth than most mammals, because human infants have absolutely huge and absolutely silly-shaped heads. I don't know, not my area.

Its not your area?A sly joke.?
Humans difficulty is from the arrangement of the whole area there and head/shoulders ios just another factor. Women are unique and alone in this situation which is why evolution scrambles to explain that it was the standing erect that changed womens body.
Female critters do not have pain in intensity, duration or at all .
Elephants or apes have little or no difficulty. There is no comparison in the animal kingdom of the agony of our women with creatures.
Just google the subject and you can find some good short articles on this. There is a Nat geographic article back some years with a woman researcher discussing it.

 

[IzzyPop]

Its not your area?A sly joke.?
Humans difficulty is from the arrangement of the whole area there and head/shoulders ios just another factor. Women are unique and alone in this situation which is why evolution scrambles to explain that it was the standing erect that changed womens body.
Female critters do not have pain in intensity, duration or at all .
Elephants or apes have little or no difficulty. There is no comparison in the animal kingdom of the agony of our women with creatures.
Just google the subject and you can find some good short articles on this. There is a Nat geographic article back some years with a woman researcher discussing it.

It has been mentioned a few times already. It isn't the 'standing erect' that gives women difficulty giving birth. It is our huge freaking heads.

Oh, and check out hyenas. They have a hard time with giving birth.

 

[Naraoia]

Its not your area?A sly joke.?

It's called honesty in these parts. It means I know hardly anything about the subject.

Methinks you are paranoid.

<more lack of substance>
Just google the subject and you can find some good short articles on this. There is a Nat geographic article back some years with a woman researcher discussing it.

Hey, if you gave me an actual link I might even concede the point

 

[jamesrwright3]

Sorry the cecum is definitely not vestigal.
That is the funniest thing I have heard in a long time. I guess people are in desperate need to label anything as vestigal..my leg can be removed, and I still would be able to get around..maybe my leg is vestigal.

 

[Baggins]

Sorry the cecum is definitely not vestigal.
That is the funniest thing I have heard in a long time. .

Argument by assertion, very convincing.

Unfortunately for you the medical community disagrees with you.

Who to believe..............mmmmmmmm

Sorry james you just don't convince me with that brilliant assertion, I'll go with evidence

T

hough many vestigial organs have no function, complete non-functionality is not a requirement for vestigiality (Crapo 1985; Culver et al. 1995; Darwin 1872, pp. 601-609; Dodson 1960, p. 44; Griffiths 1992; Hall 2003; McCabe 1912, p. 264; Merrell 1962, p. 101; Moody 1962, p. 40; Muller 2002; Naylor 1982; Strickberger 2000; Weismann 1886, pp. 9-10; Wiedersheim 1893, p. 2, p. 200, p. 205).

From talk origins

Guess you'd need to understand what a vestigial organ is then you might not find it so funny that the caecum is vestigial in humans.

Read this to enlighten yourself:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#vestiges

 

[jamesrwright3]

]Argument by assertion, very convincing.

Unfortunately for you the medical community disagrees with you.

Arguing by ignorance..very unconvincing

http://www.toilet-related-ailments.com/cecum.html

The cecum has a definite function..and no..the medical community doesn't disagree with me

Sorry james you just don't convince me with that brilliant assertion, I'll go with evidence

You made yourself look stupid with your ignorant assertion.

Guess you'd need to understand what a vestigial organ is then you might not find it so funny that the caecum is vestigial in humans.

I know what a vestigal organ is. Obviously you don't if you think a cecum is one of them

 

[Vene]

Arguing by ignorance..very unconvincing

http://www.toilet-related-ailments.com/cecum.html

The cecum has a definite function..and no..the medical community doesn't disagree with me






You made yourself look stupid with your ignorant assertion.




I know what a vestigal organ is. Obviously you don't if you think a cecum is one of them

If it's not vestigial, then why is the cecum the site of cellulose digesting in other animals, but not in humans? It's just a pointless pouch.

 

[Baggins]

If it's not vestigial, then why is the cecum the site of cellulose digesting in other animals, but not in humans? It's just a pointless pouch.

Exactly, poor old James doesn't even understand what a vestigial organ is and yet he is still capable of pontificating about it and making a spectacle of himself.

If he had only read the links I posted, which scientifically define what a vestigial organ is, fewer people would be pointing and laughing now.

Still it always worth watching a creationist giving his foot both barrels, sort of confirms that everything is right with the world.

seriously James, look up the scientific definition of vestigial organ and you will see why you are wrong and the caecum is defined as vestigial in humans.

 

[Athrond]

You're asking us to second guess God and His design, based on our limited understanding.
I don't fully know His design plan.
For instance, I read recently of a possible use for the appendix.
still, I don't know why God did it that way.

gues dying because of your appendix is gods plan. so much for free will then...

 

[jamesrwright3]

Exactly, poor old James doesn't even understand what a vestigial organ is and yet he is still capable of pontificating about it and making a spectacle of himself

.

Poor old baggins has been shown to be wrong once again. I know what a vestigal organ is..I know a cecum is not one.

If he had only read the links I posted, which scientifically define what a vestigial organ is, fewer people would be pointing and laughing now.

haha people are pointing and laughing at you because you were putting forth such nonsense that a cecum is a vestigal organ. A while back people were claiming the appendix was a vestigal organ..I still find that to be humorus.

Still it always worth watching a creationist giving his foot both barrels, sort of confirms that everything is right with the world.

All this proves is that evolutionists are willing to stretch and use their imagination to say something is a vestigal organ when it really isn't.

seriously James, look up the scientific definition of vestigial organ and you will see why you are wrong and the caecum is defined as vestigial in humans]

Nope, I have looked it up..it is not a vestigal organ.

 

[jamesrwright3]

If it's not vestigial, then why is the cecum the site of cellulose digesting in other animals, but not in humans? It's just a pointless pouch.

If you would have read the link I posted its not a pointless pouch.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

Arguing by ignorance..very unconvincing

http://www.toilet-related-ailments.com/cecum.html

The cecum has a definite function..and no..the medical community doesn't disagree with me






You made yourself look stupid with your ignorant assertion.




I know what a vestigal organ is. Obviously you don't if you think a cecum is one of them

You are wrong, this is the link you provided, nowhere in it does it say that the Cecum has a use. It fact still having a Cecum makes it difficult to defecate. Life would be so much easier if we did not have one, then we could defecate standing up.

Maybe YEC have evolved further than others and lost the Cecum; I mean, they are always doing it standing up.



The Cecum

Shaped like a pouch, the cecum (also known as caecum) is where the colon begins. It is connected to the small intestines through the ileocecal valve.
The ileocecal valve is the inlet valve of the colon. It acts as a one way valve to allow food wastes to flow from the small intestines into the colon, but prevents waste in the colon from leaking into the small intestines.
Located below the ileocecal valve is the appendix, which has a channel opening.
For obvious reasons, all the organs at this 'traffic junction' for the flow of waste - caecum, ileocecal valve and appendix - must be cleared of waste on a daily basis.
This can only be achieved by using the squatting position for waste evacuation.
In the squatting position, the right thigh, pressing against the lower abdomen on the right side of the body, 'squeezes' the caecum to force wastes upwards into the ascending colon and away from the appendix, ileocecal valve and small intestines.
As a result of waste being pushed away and out of the caecum, the appendix would never be clogged with waste. The ileocecal valve also stays securely closed to guard against any leakage of waste into the small intestines.

 

[jamesrwright3]

Function of the Cecum

http://www.becomehealthynow.com/ebookprint.php?id=787

In humans, the cecum's main functions are to absorb fluids and salts that remain after completion of intestinal digestion and absorption and to mix its contents with a lubricating substance, mucus. The cecum's internal wall is composed of a thick mucous membrane through which water and salts are absorbed. Beneath this lining is a deep layer of muscle tissue that produces churning and kneading motions.

 

[Baggins]

.
Poor old baggins has been shown to be wrong once again. I know what a vestigal organ is..I know a cecum is not one.

Thus proving that, as I said, you don't know what a vestigial organ is.

I'll post the link again so others can see that I am right even if you don't read it

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#vestiges

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#vestiges_functional

First, and most importantly, this line of argumentation is beside the point, since it is unnecessary for vestiges to lack a function (see Muller 2002 for a modern discussion of the vestigial concept that specifically includes functionality).

Humans may have a vestigial caecum, since we are descendants of herbivorous mammals, but neither we nor any other primate can have a vestigial gizzard like that found in birds

Th caecum had a function in our ancestors that it no longer has in us, therefore it fits the definition of vestigial as used by scientists

haha people are pointing and laughing at you because you were putting forth such nonsense that a cecum is a vestigal organ. A while back people were claiming the appendix was a vestigal organ..I still find that to be humorus.

The appendix is part of the caecum and falls under the same definition of vestigiality.

The one that you seem unaware of that all scientists use.

All this proves is that evolutionists are willing to stretch and use their imagination to say something is a vestigal organ when it really isn't.

All this proves is that you are still unaware of the definition of vestigial, and are too proud to actually go and look it up in the links that I have given.

Nope, I have looked it up..it is not a vestigal organ.

Sad; if you had actually done that you would, without doubt, have quoted from the site you found and posted a link to it.

The fact you haven't just shows that you know you are wrong but just can't admit it.

I have seen this in creationists time and time again, they will swear blind that he sky is green in the face of all evidence, in the face of definitions of blue and green and photographs of the sky.

seriously go and read the definitions, with citations, that I provided and slink away.

You are only making it worse for yourself