Bat Bones and Intelligent Design

[baddogma]

I think it will not be disputed when I say that all mammals have solid bones, and that all birds have hollow bone

s.

Actually no bones are solid. All bones have a pithy bubbly marrow. Mammals have a thicker wall and more dense marrow, and bird bones are more dense walls with more of a spider web like marrow. Ivory is more solid, but still has a root with blood flow. Antler also has a pithy marrow and horn is simply compressed hair. Mountain sheep horns are like finger nails, skin with keratin.

Birds are a DIRECT descendant of dinosaurs, which came from reptiles.
mammals are a direct descendant of mammals.
Reptiles, birds, and mammals have all evolved independent ways of flight.
There are no flying reptiles today, but there are many gliders such as "flying snakes" There are many gliding mammals as well.

I just skimmed the thread, but I'll try to catch up. I hope this helps.

[baddogma]

Simply because they are designed differently, doesn't make there design in error.

True, but the theist claim is INTELLIGENT design. Modern animals are so full of features that are not intelligent at ALL. Any designer would be fired on the spot. Our eyes are a classic example, they are ass backwards with the "wiring" between the lens and the "film". We have a blind spot and the image is up side down. To solve this problem we have "software" to correct the image in our brains and the muscles cause the eye to bounce around to make up for the blind spot. It works so well most people are unaware of the blind spot at all.

It is very easy to destroy intelligent design claims as shown in court by Ken Miller. He is a Catholic, but understands evolution and gave evidence to back up everything he claimed. Evidence is something ID believers cannot offer.

I can post unintelligent "design" organs all day. They ONLY make sense if evolution is a fact. It is.

Other examples of evolution are:
Endogenous retrovirus insertions
Atavisms and vestigeal organs
DNA and junk DNA
The broken vitamin C gene
the lack of ANY special creation, ALL organisms share a common ancestor.
aaaaaaand the fossil record, which isn't even necessary to prove macro evolution beyond the shadow of a doubt.

There are other sciences that back evolution such as geology and an old Earth. IF Genesis were true, there would be a single layer in the rock that had ALL created life in it. We see that nowhere on the planet.

A few examples of unintelligent design would be snakes with hind legs, dolphins and whales with hind limbs, whales with teeth, dolphins with organs for smell when they only use their blow holes to breath, humans with bony tails, reptiles with blind eyes under skin. There are so many. Yet we never see "mutations" such as a reptile with breasts, mammals with feathers, fish with hair, or a tetrapod with an extra set of wings like a Pegasus.

There is no intelligent design. There is no evidence for a designer. ID explains nothing. the ONLY theory that makes sense is evolution through natural selection. There is also more evidence to support the theory than could be covered in a life time. There has been ZERO evidence to challenge the scientific theory such as an anachronism in the fossil record like a mammal in the Pre-Cambrian or a special creation such as a mermaid that does not share a common ancestor with ALL other life.

I challenge theists to give a single example of a special creation, or an irreducibly complex organ.

[Bill]

Originally Posted by baddogma

Actually no bones are solid.

For the sake of simplicity, I shortened the correct term "pneumatic bones" into "hollow bones" for the final result would be identical, without having to go through a lengthy debate on whether the two terms are freely interchangeable.

You might to look at this vid which takes the idea and adds a lot more other science to the mix.

[baddogma]

Originally Posted by Bill

For the sake of simplicity, I shortened the correct term "pneumatic bones" into "hollow bones" for the final result would be identical, without having to go through a lengthy debate on whether the two terms are freely interchangeable.

You might to look at this vid which takes the idea and adds a lot more other science to the mix.

Gotcha!
Good video, I only caught one error on his part. He claimed marsupials are only found in Australia. Not true. Opossums are in North America where all marsupials originated, down through South America and across to Australia.

[baddogma]

How bad does a defect have to be before it is universally accepted that it is a defect? So bad that it causes the creatures to actually die out?

One of my favorites is the pig who's tusk grows back in a curl that can eventually pierce it's own skull causing a slow painful death.

Good job there.....creator....

[ilj30]

Originally Posted by baddogma

Good job there.....creator....

Wow, you are harsh!

So, obviously you think that evolution is the only possible explanation for life on earth. Everything just randomly fell into place over millions of years for life to exist as it does now. Ok, fine.

There are many Christians who also believe in macro-evolution, and believe that it can be harmonized with the Bible (although I am not one of them).

Regardless, setting evolution aside (since you don't seem to want to consider any evidence to the contrary), why do you believe that Christianity is simply "blind faith"? Have you considered that it may be possible that Christianity may be the truth? What has turned you away from Christianity? (Feel free to open a new thread if necessary)

[Bill]

Originally Posted by ilj30

Wow, you are harsh!

Bad is very new to our debating style - he was gently prodded when he first arrived that he has to leave all his dogmas hitched up outside when he comes in here to wrassle with us, but it will be some time before he feels fully comfy without them constantly nuzzling up against his mental reflexes.

[debbs]

Originally Posted by ilj30

Wow, you are harsh!

So, obviously you think that evolution is the only possible explanation for life on earth. Everything just randomly fell into place over millions of years for life to exist as it does now. Ok, fine.

There are many Christians who also believe in macro-evolution, and believe that it can be harmonized with the Bible (although I am not one of them).

Regardless, setting evolution aside (since you don't seem to want to consider any evidence to the contrary), why do you believe that Christianity is simply "blind faith"? Have you considered that it may be possible that Christianity may be the truth? What has turned you away from Christianity? (Feel free to open a new thread if necessary)

I think agnosticism is self explanatory .... we don't know many things and therefore we are seekers of answers in many things .... religion being one of them.

Christianity is based on faith, blind or otherwise. You follow the teachings of a book that has passed through centuries of power hungry, wealthy men. Men who in their quest for more money and power, who using their influences, have changed or removed portions of the bible. Even devout relgious scholars have found where the bible has been incorrectly translated.

So it is true that the mass majority of Christians follow the bible on blind faith ... and what ever sect of christianity they are from, have their relgious leaders reinterpret the bible for their congregations ... Catholics, Methodist, Lutheran, etc .... what other kind of faith would you call it? Most call it blind faith b/c it is believed verbatim, even though it has been proven that it been tampered with. What kind of faith is it otherwise? It certainly cannot be called informed faith in the Bible ...

Why does there have to be a specific incident which turned a person away from a particular sect of christianity? Couldn't it be from years of studying and contemplation, seeking answers, seeking the truth? Many can live a meaningful life, parallel to a christian life and simply be spiritual. Most follow the commandments because they are basic tenants for a good society ... why does their need to be some big epiphany in their life for them to reject the Bible as the actual word of a god?

[baddogma]

Originally Posted by ilj30

Wow, you are harsh!

So, obviously you think that evolution is the only possible explanation for life on earth. Everything just randomly fell into place over millions of years for life to exist as it does now. Ok, fine.

There are many Christians who also believe in macro-evolution, and believe that it can be harmonized with the Bible (although I am not one of them).

Regardless, setting evolution aside (since you don't seem to want to consider any evidence to the contrary), why do you believe that Christianity is simply "blind faith"? Have you considered that it may be possible that Christianity may be the truth? What has turned you away from Christianity? (Feel free to open a new thread if necessary)

Evolution is the only scientific theory that works because there are no others that do. Feel free to name one that does. No, I do not think things randomly fell into place, just the opposite when you understand natural selection. Christianity and the Genesis account cannot be reconciled without major cherry picking and willfully ignoring things like plants and fish and birds being here for "thousands of years = a day" and then the sun comes along days later?!? I HAVE considered Christianity as a truth, but decided it is false. It is self contradictory. You cannot have a omniscient, omnipotent god and end up with Christianity. The entire premise of a garden of Eden and a seven day creation followed by sin and a fall are simply a set up by an evil god who saw it coming long before he created anything. Free will does not explain it. He still knows our days before we are created and we are predestined to believe or not believe. You cannot choose to believe without cognitive dissonance and compartmentalization, anything that is not based on evidence. Christianity simply fails when it comes to evidence. There was no Garden of Eden, there was no global flood, everything Jesus did was copied from earlier mythical savior figures. There is ZERO contemporary evidence Jesus, the Christ even existed as a man. No one IN the bible or out side of the bible that knew him FIRST HAND ever wrote a word. Not one. All we have is what some one says some one else said Jesus said. There was no Exodus from Egypt, the compilation of the selected books in the bible contradict. You can argue any point either way using selected scripture. EVERY argument I have ever heard from a Christian ends up with them throwing the faith card. I don't say it, THEY do.
As far as evidence to the contrary of evolution, there simply is none. If there were they would parade it around like the Shroud of Turin. They could make a case in court. Yet all they can do and ever do is pick at "the gaps". They point to the complexity and can't explain it, therefore their god did it.
The current theory of evolution would be simple to destroy as I have mentioned already. Rabbit bones in the Pre-Cambrian, a single organism that was specially created and didn't fall into the family tree. I have yet to see a creationist explain ERVs, atavisms and vestigeal organs, the broken vitamin C gene, DNA and junk DNA, the lack of all creatures mixed in a single layer in the fossil record. They cannot explain WHY we look the way we do. Evolution through natural selection DOES. It's a beautiful theory. Sad how 99% of those that reject it can't even demonstrate they have a working knowledge of what it is they are rejecting. I have yet to encounter a Christian or Muslim that actually understands the scientific theory. Like I said, I accept it based on the evidence, not on faith or for a want to believe in it.

I invite you to present some evidence that counters evolution in favor if ID.
You will be the first.

Willful ignorance of the evidence, does not negate the evidence.

[baddogma]

Originally Posted by Bill

Bad is very new to our debating style - he was gently prodded when he first arrived that he has to leave all his dogmas hitched up outside when he comes in here to wrassle with us, but it will be some time before he feels fully comfy without them constantly nuzzling up against his mental reflexes.

Define dogma.

I have evidence, not dogma. Dogma is contrary to evidence.
If I am out of line using evidence to support my world view I am in the wrong place. Say the word and I'm gone.