Thursday, May 5, 2011

Something to consider

      While browsing, I ran across this site.  It seems to be written by an evolutionist.  They are challenging the idea of design.  As you can see from the article, Bad design indicates evolution, yet I have some questions.
Please read

http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/article.shtml

     The first question I wish to pose to this writer is in the claim about the human eye.  Is it really poor design.  Whenever I have been asked about the eye I simply ask them "Where do I sign up?".  My eyes are going down the tubes since I have to now wear reading glasses, I would like a new perfect pair.  It is obvious that those who question the design of the eye seem to think that they know what the perfect design for a replicating biological system, such as the eye, is.  Since they know this I would be sure that they have demonstrated the perfect design and can produce it as with all other items that mankind has designed.  It seems to me to be extremely arregant on the part of those who question the design of the eye.  No one has ever been able to even design a self-replicating biological system in the lab.  How do they know that the design of the eye is flawed?
     The issue with vestigial organs shows that the writer has not done their homework.  The appendix has been shown to be a vital part in human development.  Here is a link that shows the value of the appendix
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v3/i1/appendix.asp
Look under functions of the human appendix.
     As far as the homology of organisms, it can only be true if you arbitrarily define homology as relational meaning that they are of common decent.  This is question begging at its best.

2 comments:

  1. Much of the article was spent questioning why God created the world with "imperfections." But Genesis 1:31 says "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day." So when He designed all things, they were "perfect" or at least "perfect for its purpose." Then the article goes into why God created purely carnivorous animals, but who says they were ALWAYS carnivorous. In facts Gen 1:30 says "And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” So God designed them to eat plants not meat. BOO YAHH!
    As far as the "why didn't God design every creature with a dramatically different system and features- who says He has to? This seems to be a point of preference that a omnipotent designer would created everything as 100% unique. However, if you or I found a "good" way to design a living creature, we would stick with it and continue to use that prototype, right? The fact that God created things with similar features does not prove that they weren't created by His design.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good thinking Nina, you are using your baloney tester to your advantage. keep it up

    ReplyDelete