I read the article. It assumes Darwinian evolution is fact, then explains a number of phenomenon according to that assumption. Where are the scientific studies on which these explanations are based? I remember very well being taught in school that the appendix was a vestigial organ, a product of evolution which was no longer necessary. Scientists now recognize that this belief was wrong. Same for the thymus and tonsils. “Junk” DNA isn’t junk, but contains information necessary for cell function. Consider the article’s statement about the need to pull wisdom teeth—some dentists question whether it should be done routinely simply based on the (evolutionary) idea that because human jaws and brains have evolved, wisdom teeth are no longer needed. Other dentists believe that such things as diet and growth rates may be the primary causes of why human mouths seem to be smaller. For example, people now tend to eat more cooked, soft foods than hundreds of years ago, so do less chewing—the if-you-don’t-use-it-you’ll-lose-it principle. And Americans, who tend to have more problems with small mouths, also may be maturing faster than people in other parts of the world due to hormones in food; as a result facial bones may not have enough growth time before wisdom teeth come in. And of course, there’s the possibility of genetic entropy occurring, in which the human population would lose, over time, the genetic information needed to make jawbones grow enough to make space for all the teeth. So, for just this one phenomenon there are a number of very probable causes other than Darwinian evolution. It’s silly to assume that this, or anything else listed in the article, is simply a consequence of Darwinian evolution and nothing else.
And, if evolution did lead to smaller jaws and fewer teeth, this would seem to indicate a loss of complexity, rather than a gain. How does that support Darwinian evolution?
Susan
No comments:
Post a Comment