Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!flink
From: flink@umcp-cs.UUCP (Paul V. Torek)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Vestigal Organs
Message-ID: <1084@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 20:34:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1084
Posted: Fri Aug  2 20:34:34 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Aug-85 21:50:17 EDT
References: <347@scgvaxd.UUCP> <14600028@hpfcrs.UUCP>
Reply-To: flink@maryland.UUCP (Paul V. Torek)
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 28

In article <14600028@hpfcrs.UUCP> lief@hpfcla.UUCP (lief) writes:
>>Indeed, many insect species have "vestigal" wings, which are small 
>>non-functional organs sitting right where the wings were/are on the
>>closest related species.  If there's a God who created all species
>>from scratch, He must be trying awful hard to trick us into believing
>>in evolution! [Paul Torek]
>
>As a creationist, I believe that "vestigal" organs demonstrate "regression" of
>species over time, and serve no evidence for evolution.  I may be all wet, but
>I really fail too see how "vestigal" organs serve as good evidence of
>evolution. [Lief Sorensen]

Vestigal organs, like a parasitic insect's ultra-shrunken wings, are
PROGRESSION NOT REGRESSION because they HELP the insect to survive and
reproduce, given its parasitic lifestyle!  A parasitic insect with defunct
wings wastes less energy maintaining a useless body part, and is less
visible and less easily removed by the host.  On the other hand, a vestigal
wing is not quite as good as no wing at all, but there has not been enough
time for evolution to go that far.  So the facts here are consistent with
evolution theory.  But they are not consistent with the species-by-species
Creation hypothesis (unless God is trying to fool us!), because by that
hypothesis God wouldn't have bothered with the vestigal organs.

Of course, this doesn't necessarily refute the "kind"-by-"kind" Creation
hypothesis -- it depends what a "kind" is.  But then, there has never been
more to the notion of a "kind" than blatantly subjective classifications.

--Paul V Torek, iconoclast for all seasons