Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site phri.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!pesnta!phri!lonetto
From: lonetto@phri.UUCP (Michael Lonetto)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <365@phri.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 18:31:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: phri.365
Posted: Fri Aug  2 18:31:24 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 4-Aug-85 10:32:23 EDT
References: <347@scgvaxd.UUCP> <14600028@hpfcrs.UUCP>
Organization: Public Health Research Inst. (NY, NY)
Lines: 28

> Do these "vestigal" organs show "pregression" or "regression".  In otherwords
> can these mean that at one time whales could walk, but due to some mutation,
> the legs became useless?  I would call this "regression".  On the other hand,
> does this mean whales never could walk, but may in the future as the legs
> further develop?  I would call this "progression".
> 
> 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.
> 

Has it ever occurred to you that for a creature who swims, and which has
the ability to use it's body and tail for this purpose (like a fish or a
WHALE) legs could increase drag and thus be a disadvantage.  The degener-
ation of said legs would lead to a more steamlined form, and thus be an 
example of a series of small beneficial mutations and selection over time
leading to the creation of a new form.  You needn't call this evolution.

But I would.
-- 
____________________

Michael Lonetto  Public Health Research Institute,
455 1st Ave, NY, NY 10016  
(allegra!phri!lonetto)

"BUY ART, NOT COCAINE"