Ok Nic,
How do evolutionist support walking upright?
If mankind is the highest evolved species (mentally), what are the proposed benefits of bipedal movement? Other quadripod/bipods can still reach higher vegetation----bears, apes, dogs, etc... yet all other species (with the exception of a few reptiles) can run faster on all fours. What would be the evolutionary "advantage" for walking upright?
If standing erect requires much more balance than being on all fours... why are humans the only species without a tail?
Since 50% of each day is in darkness and since humans have very little physiological defenses against predators, why is their night vision one of the worst in the entire animal kingdom?
What would be the evolutionary benefit of not being reproductive or approaching physical maturity until approx. 12 years of life (roughly 30% into the life span of ancient man)... compare this with the life cycle of any other mammal. What other animal is not "full grown" so late in life... why?
What is the evolutionary advantage of exploiting available resource for humans having such a "delicate" digestive system? Other animals within the same food chain can eat things that would make a human sick or die.
What is the advantage of being practically hairless?
What is the advantage of male facial hair?
What is the advantage of emotions like sadness, jealosy, or remorse?
I will now attempt to answer as many of these as I can under 300 words. (Therefore I'll chose the ones I like best.)
Walking upright does impede movement, however it has many benifits: Climbing, it allows us to use two hands for tools or weapons without making us immobile, etc. But if, as you say, it would be better to walk on all fours, then that just hints at a really stupid god. (50 Words)
Night vision: True humans can't see well in the dark, but that helps to PROVE evolution, not disprove it. If a designer invented the perfect eyeball, he would use it in all his creations. The variety of optical recievers in the animal kingdom supports evolution. (45 words)
Hair and lack thereof: Not all things have to be benifitial for survival, part of natural selection is the ability to reproduce. So if most early humans like mates with less hair, then humans with less hair would have more kids, and produce more kids with less hair. Same thing but reversed for facial hair. Some girls like it I guess. (57 words)
Emotions: Not all improvements have to be just for that single organism, the species should improve as a whole. Remorse prevents murders, thus helping the spieces survive. Anger and fear makes a threatened organism retaliate, helping survival. Sadness makes people more considerate of their own spieces. Jealosy is a more single organism benifit, it benifits that one organism, thus assisting in its survival. (62 words)
Just because something, like an eye, or ear, or digestive system could theoretically have evolved in a better way, doesn't meen that it must have by now. Evolution basically means that animals can branch off and change, if the change is helpfull to the species as a whole it probably will live. HOWEVER, these variations in design make the idea of a designer look pretty unlikely. When people invent a better lens they generally use that in all their products, same with a better microchip. But when god invents a better eyeball, why doesn't he use it in all his creations? Especially considering that an all powerfull god would not have limited resources. (113 words)
Sorry that's a total of 327 words. Please forgive me.
LtCmd.Lore
