Useless body parts?

> Hey Guys and Gals,
>
> Ok folks I have a challenge for you. I am going into a career as a
> scientist not to make a lot of money but because I feel that I can delve
> into the depths of Lords works. (snip)...

Well, that's very admirable. :-) That is a similar motivation to my own a
couple of decades ago, even though I didn't end up being a career
scientist, rather an educator ("Those who can - do, those who can't -
teach.") ;-)

> “One needs to be very careful when applying the term “useless” [“Useless
> Body Parts,” June]. Just because we don’t understand its use, whatever
> entity it is, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have a very valid use or need.

One needs to be very careful with the definition of "vestigial" as used by
evolutionists. It most definitely is NOT synomous with "useless", rather
it means that a structure has a *reduced* function that was *more useful*
to an ancestor. For example, perhaps the appendix has some use to the
immune system, but it is a small use at best. In fact, many more people
appear to b harmed by the appendix becoming inflamed and bursting than the
number of those who are helped by its influence on antibodies of the
circulatory system.

Perhaps the biggest lesson is that binary black/white thinking about
science isn't the best tactic.

In God's Peace,

Roger
Received on Mon Feb 21 20:02:04 2005