RE: [asa] AIG argues (again) for design

If animals could be changed after the fall from being herbivores to
carnivores (extrapolating Isa 11:7 and 65:25 backwards to the original
paradisaic conditions) it doesn't seem a great miracle or shocking design
element to retool the millipede to kill other insects. So they would
probably say, "Yes He did, and this shows the ravaging consequences of man's
sin."

How do they know the millipede would be killed by its own cyanide, just
because other insects are killed by it?

I suppose this same argument should apply to all sorts of other animals,
such as the poison dart frog, or poisonous spiders, or venomous snakes who
can kill other snakes with their venom. Why don't they die from storing
their own venom? (and why don't porcupines get poked to death by their own
or each other's quills?)

What do evolutionists say about how animals could develop the adaptive
capacity to become accustomed to storing toxic poisons which kill others but
not themselves?

Jon Tandy

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Ted Davis
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 10:05 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu; burgytwo@juno.com
Subject: Re: [asa] AIG argues (again) for design

>>> Carol or John Burgeson <burgytwo@juno.com> 10/03/06 10:24 AM
>>> >>>tells us
once again about the shenanigans of AIG and company. As follows:

The system that produces the cyanide is extremely
complex and would have had to evolve at the same time, otherwise none of it
would have worked.

This type of millipede had to be specially designed to do what it does, and
what it does do, it does do well.
 
Ted comments:
This is very interesting for what it does not say, more than for what it
does say. Did God "design" the millipede to kill other organisms--and even
to give pain to sentient beings such as the larger animals that won't eat
it?

If so, what about the old conundrum about no animal death and suffering
(they go hand in hand) prior to the fall of Adam? Did God "retool" this
creature after a certain fruit was consumed, so that it then could deliver
pain to larger animals and death to its fellow insects? If so, what does
this say about "design" and the fall and God's intentions? Or, perhaps (as
Edward Hitchcock believed), God already foreknew the fall and "pre-designed"
a world replete with animal death and suffering. The YECs would utterly
reject that view, but then what exactly do they do with the millipede?

Feel free, Burgy, to share this response with AIG.

Ted

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe
asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Oct 3 12:47:36 2006