Claim CB360:
Practically all "vestigial" organs in man have been shown to have definite
uses and not to be vestigial at all.
Source:
Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master
Books, pp. 75-76.
Response:
- "Vestigial" does not mean an organ is useless. A vestige is a "trace or
visible sign left by something lost or vanished" (G. & C. Merriam 1974,
769). Examples from biology include leg bones in snakes, eye remnants
in blind cave fish (Yamamoto and Jeffery 2000), extra toe bones in
horses, wing stubs on flightless birds and insects, and molars in
vampire bats. Whether these organs have functions is irrelevant. They
obviously do not have the function that we expect from such parts in
other animals, for which creationists say the parts are "designed."
Vestigial organs are evidence for evolution because we expect
evolutionary changes to be imperfect as creatures evolve to adopt new
niches. Creationism cannot explain vestigial organs. They are evidence
against creationism if the creator follows a basic design principle
that form follows function, as H. M. Morris himself expects (1974, 70).
They are compatible with creation only if anything and everything is
compatible with creation, making creationism useless and unscientific.
- Some vestigial organs can be determined to be useless if experiments
show that organisms with them survive no better than organisms without
them.
Links:
Theobald, Douglas, 2004. 29+ Evidences for macroevolution: Prediction
2.1: Anatomical vestiges.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#morphological_vestiges
References:
- G. & C. Merriam. 1974. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary. New York:
Simon & Schuster.
- Morris, H., 1974. (see above).
- Yamamoto, Y. and W. R. Jeffery., 2000. Central role for the lens in
cave fish eye degeneration. Science 289: 631-633.
created 2003-5-29
