Evolution or Intelligent Design
I poop therefore I know I am not the product of intelligent design.
An argument often put forth by believers in creationism is that if evolution is true, there should be no apes. Unfortunately the truth is twisted when this argument is used, because nobody said humans evolved from apes directly. Scientists agree that humans evolved from an ape-like creature, as did Neanderthals who have since died out. Apes are still alive because they evolved along their own line.
If we were the product of intelligent design, why do we eat and poop? Clearly these are not intelligent functions. An intelligent design would not die, we would not need to reproduce, we would not need to consume other intelligently designed beings, and would not produce waste.
Image via Wikipedia
The very notion of sexual reproduction allows for a mixing of genes, it encourages evolution. It allows for variation, with the better variations surviving and reproducing, the weaker ones dying off. When we look at the skeletons of other animals we can see they are very similar to our own, one bone longer here, one shorter there. With so much in common with the rest of the animal kingdom, we obviously came from one source, an intelligent design would have more variety, like how a computer resembles nothing of a car, pencil, or boat.
In humans we have almost eliminated natural selection because most societies preserve their weaker members, who in wild animals would have been killed, or died. We even allow them to reproduce.
In the wild when inferior, or different, animals are born they are often killed off by their parents, or left to die. Occasionally though they will survive, having an advantage to the others and will reproduce, passing that trait on. Eventually their offspring are able to out compete the original version of the animal and they soon out number the original, perhaps becoming more and more evolved and distinct over time.
If dogs evolved from wolves, why do we still have wolves?
This question, is again, a twist of facts. All domestic dogs descended from wolves, but they did so with human intervention. You will not see a pair of wolves give birth to dalmatians. Thousands of years ago wolves started hanging around with people, this was to their mutual advantage.
Photosource http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wolves_in_Kolm%C3%A5rden.jpg
Over time the people kept the friendlier puppies and either ate or got rid of the others. They selected dogs that exhibited certain traits. Pups who were born with mutations, such as different colors, sizes, or fur types, would have been killed in the wild, but were kept by people. As humans developed agriculture and started keeping other species of animal, dogs were selected who were good at herding or guarding. Even smaller dogs were eventually considered valuable to keep beds warm at night.
We still have wolves because wolves live in the wild and are not in direct competition with dogs.
Compare this to the natural evolution of the horse. Horses were once tiny creatures, they had multiple toes and stood only 8 or 9 inches tall. Called “Dawn-Horses” these small creatures gradually mutated with the larger members surviving, and the smaller ones not. A few other changes occurred too, four toes on each front foot gradually became one solid hoof on each foot. Being larger was a survival advantage, they were better able to see a predator, better able to run from it, or kick it.
Photo Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hyracotherium_Eohippus_hharder.jpg
The above photo is of Eohippus, or Dawn Horse.
The giraffe is often sighted as an example of how evolution is misunderstood. Some people think the giraffe consciously grew a longer neck in an effort to reach food on taller trees. Giraffes did not grow longer necks to reach tall plants, the animals who had longer necks survived because they were able to reach more food, thus the shorter necked animals died off and did not reproduce. An interesting note, the neck of the giraffe has just as many vertebrae as the neck of a human. Giraffes were simply lucky to have had a beneficial mutation occur.
Were these all products of intelligent design, trees would be short enough for everyone to eat, or would not need to be eaten at all. Perhaps it is the water, the rocks, and the wind which are part of an intelligent design, with everything else being random occurrences. I poop, therefore I know I am not the product of an intelligent design.
Liked it
15 Responses to “Evolution or Intelligent Design”
On July 19, 2009 at 5:25 am
Thoroughly enjoyed this article!
On July 19, 2009 at 9:55 am
Excellent article.
On July 19, 2009 at 11:30 am
Awesome article,very interesting!
On July 19, 2009 at 11:45 am
Your argument is flawed. Think again, and go through your thought process properly when you write your articles.
Do you think it is truly possible for life forms to arise just because of a random occurence? Have you ever thought about how specific the nucleotide sequence required to give rise to a single bacteria is? Do you know how many billion bp will be required to form a human? You’re saying that’s all by chance?
Seriously, I don’t see how the creationist theory can’t work with natural selection. Think about this, God created the world and brought in the concept of natural selection to introduce more variation into the world.
Who’s to say intelligent design cannot work with natural selection? They aren’t mutually exclusive.
On July 19, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Very good article. thanks for sharing.
On July 19, 2009 at 2:05 pm
I liked the way you used the development of the dog to explain how evolution works.
On July 19, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Interesting arguments. However, I could argue just as well that we poop so plants can grow; plants grow so other things can eat; our respirations enhance each other–seems like a pretty tidy design. As for letting our \”weaker\” members live–well, trust humans to mess up just about anything; maybe that designer wasn\’t quite top of the heap as designers go. I\’ve always wondered…if God made everything, what made God? Ya see, I\’m one of those wafflers who argue both sides. /grin
On July 19, 2009 at 6:01 pm
As for most of your arguments against the theories of creation: you seem to be working under the assumption that creation and evolution are somehow, as spongepin says, mutually exclusive. Don’t you think that’s a flawed approach to begin with? Evolution is a means of creation, one of the tools used to get the job done. And yet you reason out that the tool just appeared out of nowhere and started working by itself, instead of being brought to the scene by a builder. You cannot use such flawed reasoning to consider how we came into being.
You begin this debate by being a little ludicrous. In paraphrasis you are saying: “Well, then, if everything is by intelligent design then why do we have an entrance and exit? And why are we not immortal, and why do our biological make-ups have so much in common with the rest of the animal kingdom? What’s your point? Are you saying that if humans were designed then they should have no limits, or that they should not obey the laws of the universe? That’s funny! In fact, I laughed my pooper off when I saw your introductory statement that you use as the hinge of the door your opening. Hooking the entire premise of your article on such base and flawed logic is very narrow of you!
As with every single energy source ever known to man or nature, there is no source that is pure energy. Even sunlight has residual deposits in the form of UVA and UVB light which cannot be used as energy, but are instead extra that gets deposited elsewhere. In light of this, these deposits must have somewhere to go.
Every biological entity requires energy to live and reproduce, including humans. Why is our biological make-up so similar to other things on Earth? Well, doesn’t it make sense that a signature design pattern is from one mind? But, you know, in spite of our similarities to other creatures on Earth, the differences in contrast are a thousand to one. Emotionally, spiritually, conceptually, socially, etc., we are so different from animals. In regards to pets: they’ve been around us so long that some of our baser instincts have rubbed off onto them and they have adapted to human patterns.
One last thing: trees and plants … we don’t have arms and legs for nothing.
On July 19, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Very interesting article. You put forth some very good points.
On July 19, 2009 at 8:54 pm
My argument is still the same. None of us are intelligent enough to know where we came from. Did we grow from a plant and suckle mother earth? Were we mutants who were dropped on earth from other planets? If so, how were those beings created? We have no answers, only questions.
On July 20, 2009 at 1:02 am
Good article.
On July 20, 2009 at 6:18 am
Doesn’t the fact that we want answers to these questions show our desire to reconnect with out creator?
Natural selection just doesn’t make sense to me. Most genetic mutations are harmful. You know a bit about animal husbandry, so you know that someone more intelligent than the dogs is carefully selecting desirable traits and then controlling the breeding of the dogs.
You think that because we eat, poop, and reproduce that no intelligent designer would have created us that way? The body systems that control those functions are so intricate that scientists will never be able to duplicate them.
Someday scientists may learn enough about this universe to catch up with the Christians. We’ll be waiting.
On July 20, 2009 at 8:11 am
This scientific hypothesis presents a useful and logical explanation to what is behind the appearances of the Ufos over the millennia and at the same time a sensible explanation for the ‘good measure’ intention behind, ALL the worlds religions. Buddhism without the mysticism is probably nearest the truth. That said the Bible could be said to hold the scientific framework and the KEY to the current ufo debate.We as a humanity are on our own, but not alone. This hypothesis would suggest that ET are simply waiting for our humanity to either ‘cook’ ourselves or prove ourselves as a whole, capable of controlling our aggression. The interesting thing here ,from the scientific point of view, is that instead of progression of design as evidenced by the theory of Evolution, we have progression of design by very advanced science. In other words following more or less the pathways of the theory of Evolution, but relatively speaking much quicker. If our scientists are capable of artificially creating life( See Criag ventner GENESIS II, ) then they will in the course of time create more and more complex organisms. Should our society be wise enough to avoid self-destruction,then maybe in the future, we will reach the level of interstellar technology , then our scientists may even create ‘man in their own image’. Then the buckle will be closed and our scientists will have become like those whom our ancestors mistook for ‘gods’.
I sincerely hope the scientists will start to debate this idea soon, or our humanity will disappear like the millions of humanities, that have existed on this very ancient planet/l ‘living machine’.before, for the self-evident reason we can see today.
Bottom line of this hypothesis is, that dangerous humanities, do not leave there solar systems,simply because they self-destruct before they reach the level of technology where they can.
So this hypothesis allows a compromise between the theory of evolution and creation, where we can respect the past without living in it.Essentially this argument is about the demystifying of the old understandings and the spiritualization of science/knowledge
On July 25, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Very good article, thanks for sharing!
On August 23, 2009 at 2:06 pm
I am a thorough believer of science and what you’ve brought up is pretty amazingly thought provoking. I think evolution is one part but so is intelligent design. I think both go hand in hand to form what we most like to say is the beauty of science – the world we live in now. If dogs descended from wolves, then why do wolves exist – I can answer that I think. I don’t think dogs descend from wolves, but they share a common ancestor is what I’d commonly believe.
As for the giraffes, I read somewhere that even something that you’d think is an intelligent design, a giraffe does have flaws like the long neck that when lowered means that the blood pressure is immense so any wrong movements means the giraffe suffers death. The intelligent design isn’t perfect because evolution is waiting to fill the gaps. Intelligent design is never perfect but then neither is evolution. They both collaborate to make what we see today.
Good thought provoking article.
Post Comment