Creationists: How does creation explain the existence of parasites?

[dlamberth]

Not the thread topic. Please refrain from derailing the thread any more than it's being derailed, thanks.

I'm also to blame as AV and I were just having a little side chat is all.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Edited to add: Before responding, please read this Wikipedia page on the Leucochloridium paradoxum - Wikipedia. A few responses so far don't seem to understand exactly what this organism's lifecycle really entails.

Many parasitic organisms have complex lifecycles; in some cases they are dependent on multiple species for their reproductive cycle.

Take for example, Leucochloridium paradoxum. It's a parasitic organism that reproduces via eggs inside of birds. Then the fecal matter containing the eggs are consumed by snails. The eggs hatch inside the snail and then proceed to develop into a sporocyst with various branches throughout the snail's body. The ends of the branches then develop into a broodsac which infest the snail's eyestalk.

In a highly disturbing aspect of mimicry, the broodsacs will pulsate to attract predation by birds while simultaneously mind-controlling the snail:

(Look up "Leucochloridium" on Youtube if you want to see this in action. Warning: it's a bit gross.)

Birds will then attack the snail, ripping out the broodsac from the eyestalk and then the whole cycle starts over.

This is obviously a highly complicated lifecycle that clearly defies biological evolution. Therefore it must have involved the hand of an intelligent designer.

That said, how and why would an intelligent designer create such an organism? Imagine having a parasite in your eyeball that forces you wait around until it's pecked out by a bird. What purpose does such a parasite serve?

It helps feed the birds by forcing the snails to become easy zombified prey. There, that wasn't so difficult.

 

[pitabread]

It helps feed the birds by forcing the snails to become easy zombified prey. There, that wasn't so difficult.

Again, the snails aren't the prey. The broodsacs are.

The snails simply get maimed in the process.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Again, the snails aren't the prey. The broodsacs are.

The snails simply get maimed in the process.

And the birds get fed. The bird doesn't usually eat just the eyes and leave the rest. Usually they eat the entire snale. Why? Because they are hungry. Are the birds in any way harmed by the parasite?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

For your enjoyment.

 

[pitabread]

Usually they eat the entire snale.

Do you have a citation for this? From what I've read, the birds specifically go after the broodsacs (which are designed to mimic crawling insects) and generally rip them from the snails.

Besides which the birds already have natural prey (insects), so why the need to specifically mind-control snails for that purpose?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Do you have a citation for this? From what I've read, the birds specifically go after the broodsacs (which are designed to mimic crawling insects) and generally rip them from the snails.

Birds in general eat entire snails. The birds that are attracted to the parasite are drawn to them because the worm resembles a maggot. Regardless if the bird eats just the worm or the entire snail, the bird received some nutritional value and benefits from this life cycle. Not to mention the other critters who benefit from the rest of the snail left by the bird.

 

[pitabread]

Birds in general eat entire scales. The birds that are attracted to the parasite are drawn to them because the worm resembles a maggot. Regardless if the bird eats just the worm or the entire snail, the bird received some nutritional value and benefits from this life cycle.

I'll ask again, do you have a citation that birds are typically eating the entire snails in the case of this parasite?

I'm not asking for your opinion here; I'm asking for external support for this claim.

And as I said in my edited posts, there are already organisms that provide food for birds. Why the need for this particular parasite? And why the need to involve snails in its lifecycle?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why the need for this particular parasite? And why the need to involve snails in its lifecycle?

Perhaps they add to the flavor of escargot?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

I'll ask again, do you have a citation that birds are typically eating the entire snails in the case of this parasite?

I'm not asking for your opinion here; I'm asking for external support for this claim.

And as I said in my edited posts, there are already organisms that provide food for birds. Why the need for this particular parasite? And why the need to involve snails in its lifecycle?

I said birds in general eat entire snails. Here is one such example.

But this is irrelevant to the point. It doesn't matter if the bird eats the whole snail or just the parasite worm. The point is that the bird only benefits in this life cycle.

 

[coffee4u]

Yes. If people are going to claim that such a world existed, then we should be able to try to understand how such a world worked.

This isn't a cleaner fish though. The intermediary form can't survive for very long outside of the snail's body. In that stage it actually absorbs nutrients from within the snail, not foraging on external matter.

This is a picture of what we're dealing with. This is what lives inside the snail:

That's the issue though. There doesn't seem to be any explanations for how such an organism existed prior the fall of man, and how the fall of man specifically changed the biology of such an organism.

We believe this world existed only because we have faith in God and by extension of that, his word.

But you may as well be asking how a life cycle works on a planet that no one has visited but has some scant knowledge about.
We can make guesses, that is all.

If it wasn't feeding off the shell or trail perhaps it was helpful internally. I have read that intestinal parasites such as tapeworms, hookworms can be beneficial to human health. So maybe it was similar. I am merely throwing these out as ideas. Whatever its original purpose was, that was changed and corrupted.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I said birds in general eat entire snails. Here is one such example.

But this is irrelevant to the point. It doesn't matter if the bird eats the whole snail or just the parasite worm. The point is that the bird only benefits in this life cycle.

That does not show that birds in general eat entire prey animals. If there is a large source of food animals tend to be picky in which parts that they eat. If there is a limited supply of food they will tend to eat more of it. This short video explains, in this case emphasizing when animals eat only parts of prey:

 

[pitabread]

We believe this world existed only because we have faith in God and by extension of that, his word.

Everyone has a different take on that though. So faith in God / god's word doesn't exactly give us much to go by here.

The question is whether we have a method to test competing ideas and determine which idea might be the correct idea.

But you may as well be asking how a life cycle works on a planet that no one has visited but has some scant knowledge about.
We can make guesses, that is all.

How would we test those guesses?

If it wasn't feeding off the shell or trail perhaps it was helpful internally. I have read that intestinal parasites such as tapeworms, hookworms can be beneficial to human health. So maybe it was similar. I am merely throwing these out as ideas. Whatever its original purpose was, that was changed and corrupted.

How do we distinguish between its original purpose versus the purported corruption? Is there anything we can look for to determine what that change was?

 

[pitabread]

But this is irrelevant to the point. It doesn't matter if the bird eats the whole snail or just the parasite worm. The point is that the bird only benefits in this life cycle.

If I accept that this was done for the sole benefit of birds, it still begs the question as to why the parasite requires such an overly complicated life cycle or even exist in the first place?

There are simpler ways of feeding birds that don't necessarily involve the potential maiming of other organisms.

 

[coffee4u]

Everyone has a different take on that though. So faith in God / god's word doesn't exactly give us much to go by here.

The question is whether we have a method to test competing ideas and determine which idea might be the correct idea.

How would we test those guesses?

How do we distinguish between its original purpose versus the purported corruption? Is there anything we can look for to determine what that change was?

I know it's not much to go by. That is why I suggested looking at beneficial bacteria or other similar cycles that are of benefit to all the parties involved. I am sure there are some.

Imagine for one moment that a planet is found like that, how would you test it? I doubt you could, not without going there.

 

[DamianWarS]

Edited to add: Before responding, please read this Wikipedia page on the Leucochloridium paradoxum - Wikipedia. A few responses so far don't seem to understand exactly what this organism's lifecycle really entails.

Many parasitic organisms have complex lifecycles; in some cases they are dependent on multiple species for their reproductive cycle.

Take for example, Leucochloridium paradoxum. It's a parasitic organism that reproduces via eggs inside of birds. Then the fecal matter containing the eggs are consumed by snails. The eggs hatch inside the snail and then proceed to develop into a sporocyst with various branches throughout the snail's body. The ends of the branches then develop into a broodsac which infest the snail's eyestalk.

In a highly disturbing aspect of mimicry, the broodsacs will pulsate to attract predation by birds while simultaneously mind-controlling the snail:

(Look up "Leucochloridium" on Youtube if you want to see this in action. Warning: it's a bit gross.)

Birds will then attack the snail, ripping out the broodsac from the eyestalk and then the whole cycle starts over.

This is obviously a highly complicated lifecycle that clearly defies biological evolution. Therefore it must have involved the hand of an intelligent designer.

That said, how and why would an intelligent designer create such an organism? Imagine having a parasite in your eyeball that forces you wait around until it's pecked out by a bird. What purpose does such a parasite serve?

this tends to look at creation and God as one-dimensional (the 1D being a strictly literal view). granted it doesn't fit in a literal interpretation of Genesis so you win if that's the goal but then I don't think a literal reading of Genesis was ever the goal of Genesis. the bible's goal is not to unpack the science behind everything it is there to point to spiritual truth. Armed with this knowledge, we can apply biblical truth to this parasite by way of the fall as the fall brings into this world death and destruction (similar to the parasite) that God provides a way to be rescued from and this example of the snail could serve as a metaphor for this system (we are the snail, the parasite is the sin and the bird is the final judgment of that sin). But how it literally fits in would miss the point. What does this mean if we are to accept theistic evolution? it means God is highly complex and the salvation he offers is not extended to snails. It may also point to a purpose of the snail/parasite is to feed the bird. Death is a part of the system not a conflict to it unless you forgot Christians embrace death and suffering as an integral part of salvation.

 

[Gottservant]

Being a parasite, is not wrong, if you don't damage the host's ability to be encouraged

 

[Phred]

Being a parasite, is not wrong, if you don't damage the host's ability to be encouraged

How does one encourage a snail?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How does one encourage a snail?

If you want them to run a maze a little bit of salt does the trick. Actually it tends to discourage them from going in certain directions.

 

[durangodawood]

How does one encourage a snail?

Motivational tapes. Maybe a life coach.