tigertime2 said:
1. Where are the transitional fossil records that show that this convergent evolution took place? Now from my christian point of view God Created a perfect world but Adam and Eve did not listen to what God had instructed them so after this what we call the fall or imperfection entered the created order.
There are plenty of examples of different eyes of varying complexity. Any small improvement can be the target of natural selection. This is also found in the fossil record. However, as I pointed out (and Darwin himself did) the absence of fossils is not unexpected. Show some positive evidence against evolution rather than so-called gaps. Truth be told all extant and extinct species are transitionary.
As for your perfect Adam and Eve, what constitutes a 'perfect genome'? That sounds like some sort of eugenics idea...interesting. I am very interested to hear the answer to that.
2. this is a argument that comes from a "Consumer Culture" i.e. someone has more toys than they could possible use but always wants more and newer toys. Homologous bones could show that there is a common designer leaving his pardon the pun fingerprint or biotic message to show that their is one originator of things rather than many.
Please. An omnipotent designer creates imperfect designs to create the appearance of common descent? What purpose does this serve? Wouldn't perfect body parts and functions be more indicative of a perfect creator.
3. They obviuosly exist for a reason and must have a use even though that use may not be known. The Human Appendix used to be routinely removed as was the tonsils, but recently they have found that the appendix is useful for populating the intestine with friendly bacteria and the tonsils alert the immune system to attacks. Medical Science took quite some time to work this out.
No, they don't obviously have a use. There may be some small function, however you can remove a human appendix, with minimal impact, however do the same from a rat and it is bye bye rat. This is because the original function of this organ is vestigial in humans. Hind legs in whales? Are you going to postulate a use for those? There are plenty of similar examples.
4. Again it could be argued that this is evidence of a divine arcitect. The evoluntionist argument that pseudogenes and their respective variations are shared between primates in nested hierachy, can only be explained through common evolutionary descent is an assumption. Evidence for Psuedogene function is still being accumulated.
I actually wasn't referring to pseudogenes in my original post, although they can be used to make the same point. We know how pseudogenes, transposons and retrotransposons propogate themselves in genomes. We know that they are essentially junk (except in some rare examples where their activity has led to the evolution of a novel function). We know that the nested hierarchy (your own words?) is observed in related organisms. None of this is assumed...it is recorded, with evidence, in the scientific literature. No more explanation is required. I am all ears for the references to the evidence supporting all pseudogenes' function. I could say the same for other sequences such as ERVs, retrotransposons (SINES and LINES) and transposons. Where is your alternative, creation-friendly explanation for these sequences? How much do you actually know about these sequences and how much have you gleaned from your creationist propaganda. It helps to look at all of the evidence.
