Највећи пропусти на људском телу

[Crveni Baron]

Билбијо, да те питам нешто као човек човека, онако најискреније. Одакле ти долази тај порив да упорно истрајаваш да говориш о стварима о којима очигледно не знаш ни основе? Ајде политички, морални и слични ставови, то је иднвидуално, али зашто на оваквим темама (биологија, физика, астрономија...)? Има ли нешто у теби што те боцка и не дозвољава да просто изузстиш: ”Ја о овоме не знам”? Колико си књига из биологије прочитао у животу?

 

 

Pa ko tvrdi da sam ja tu neki strucnjak? Ono sto znam pokupio sam uz put i puno toga zaboravio u medjuvremenu, Ali koliko znanje je potrebno da bi se pricalo o tome da li je covek napravljen funkcionalno?Ko moze i sa kolikim znanjem da diskutuje o tome? Ako ga je stvorio Bog, valjda je znao sta radi, ako je evoluirao, valjda se evolucija pobrinula da eliminise nepotrebno. Ako coveku ne rastu zubi doveka ( kao i kosa ) postoji nekakav razlog. Vidis, Justinijan ima primedbu da nam zubi ne rastu uvek iznova a potrebni su nam a ona zena u clanku kaze da ih imamo i previse jer sada koristimo meksu hranu sto je i tacno, danas covek moze sasvim lepo da se hrani i bez ijednog zuba u ustima. I sada ko je u pravu? 

 

I uz put sta sam ja lupio da si dosao do zakljucka da ne znam ni osnove?

 

 

... a volim i da se zabedjujem ...  

[Juan Valdez]

Ali koliko znanje je potrebno da bi se pricalo o tome da li je covek napravljen funkcionalno?

 

На овом нивоу много. Човек (живот уопште) јесте свакако функционалан. Али није оптималан. Ако се мало посветиш биологији, видећеш да је све тачно толико добро да опстане, али не више од тога. Нема говора о дизајну, већ о чистој прилагођености. Као што рекох, за сагледавање тога је неопходно много биологије (уз мало математике и сличних дисциплина). Хвала Богу, ово је слободна земља и слободан форум, па можеш да причаш шта год хоћеш, али би ваљало да знаш да много тога што испалиш нема никаквог смисла (осим ако нећеш искључиво да се зезаш и да тролујеш). Стварно много личи на оне што се окупе испред сеоске продавнице, отворе пиво и крену да састављају репрезентацију, спашавају економију Србије и света итд.

[Juan Valdez]

”У извесном смислу, таква је и природа насталих ствари, која свакако расте и троши се, и не одликује се чврстином и постојаношћу. Требало би дакле, да тела животиња и биљака, која су, на неки начин по нужности повезана у један ток и, која је захватило кретање које их води ка постојању и пропадању, да буду обухваћена природом времена, чије је својство сродно променљивим стварима.”

***

”Уосталом, Божији суд о томе да је светлост добра, није изречен зато што се Бог дивио било чему што је угодно нашему оку, већ зато што је предвидео корист која ће у будућности од ње настати."

”Не задовољава очи Божије све оно што је Он Сам створио, нити Он тако прихвата добра као ми; већ је за Њега добро оно што је настало по логосу умећа и што служи корисности некога циља. Наиме, Он Који је у Самом почетку Свога дела поставио циљ свега што је створио, а појединачне творевине саздао да допринесу крајњем циљу, оценио да је све добро, испитавши га према логосу Своје уметности.”

Јер, све лепоте творевине, Творац не гледа очима, већ неизрецивом мудрошћу посматра оно што постаје... Не треба, међутим, да мислимо да Писмо како се на исти такав начин (као нама) море и Богу учинило лепо и пријатно; тамо се, наиме, о ономе што је лепо расуђује логосом стварања.”

Свети Василије Велики, Шестоднев

[grigorije22]

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/designgonebad.html

[grigorije22]

Koja je uloga resice u grlu?

[grigorije22]

Electrical design in the human body

by Craig Savige

 

 

In the last century, our society’s dependence on electricity and all the devices associated with it has grown phenomenally. How many of us can really imagine what it would be like without electricity? Yet, electricity and devices which harness it have been around since the beginning of creation!

Electricity itself can be defined as the movement or current of small charged particles, usually electrons. Some substances, such as metals and various types of liquids, allow the movement of (or conduct) charged particles better than others. The harnessing of electricity has enabled us to develop devices which cause electrical energy to be changed into some other form of energy—e.g. heat (cooking), light (electric bulbs), motion (electric motors).

Man was not the first to harness electricity and put it to work. When we look at the human body, for example, especially the nervous system, we should conclude that the designer of the human body must have had an intricate knowledge of electronics and must have known how to harness electrical energy to change it into other forms of energy. When we consider the scale of the operation (i.e. at the atomic and microscopic levels), we can only wonder at God’s profound wisdom in creation.

The nervous system is composed of two parts: the central nervous system, which is the control centre comprising the brain and the spinal cord, and the peripheral nervous system, which consists of nerves connecting other parts of the body to the control centre. Via a combination of electrical and chemical processes, the nervous system is used to control the functioning of the entire human body.

Scientists inherently acknowledge that the nervous system is built according to an electrical design. The scientific literature describing the nervous system is replete with references to electrical theory and electrical devices that man uses today. Such references include technical words like batteries, transducers, motors, pumps, calculators, transmitters, electrochemical potential, circuitry, binary system, current, resistance, voltage, capacitance, charge. The difficulty of describing the nervous system without resorting to such language implies the Creator’s understanding prior to man’s electrical inventions.

The basic building block of the nervous system is the nerve cell, called a neuron. The brain itself consists primarily of neurons. Under a microscope a neuron looks like an octopus with many tentacles. A neuron can transmit an electrical impulse to the next neuron (see How do our nerves transmit information?). The network of electrical impulses enables us to receive information from the physical world and then send it to our brains, and vice versa. Without the neuron circuits our bodies would completely shut down, like turning off the power supply to a city.

One textbook author states, concerning the nervous system, ‘We speak of it as the most local circuit, or a microcircuit. It is very common for a particular type of microcircuit to be repeated throughout a layer or a given cell type, thus acting as a module for a specific type of information processing.’¹ [Emphasis added.]

Information from the physical world to our brain is relayed via our five senses using electrical devices which change one form of energy into electrical energy. Our bodies have sensory receptor cells because there are different types of physical stimuli to be changed into electrical signals. For example, a different type of receptor cell is required for hearing stimuli than for smell stimuli.

The neuron may be likened to a switch which is turned either on or off according to the right conditions. ‘Under normal body conditions, the frequency of [electrical pulse] transmission may range between 10 and 500 impulses per second.’² The impulse is not generated unless the neuron has been given a strong enough stimulus. It is hard to imagine the complex integration of electrical signals without realizing the Creator’s power and wisdom.

The individual neuron is only a small component in the interconnected circuitry of the nervous system. Information scientist Dr Werner Gitt says, ‘If it were possible to describe [the nervous system] as a circuit diagram, [with each neuron] represented by a single pinhead, such a circuit diagram would require an area of several square kilometres … [it would be] several hundred times more complex than the entire global telephone network.’³

To gain a true comprehension of the complexity of this circuitry, we must understand that co-ordination between neurons is essential. The computations required for such co-ordination are enormous. ‘There may be from ten trillion to one hundred trillion synapses [i.e. connections between neurons] in the brain, and each one operates as a tiny calculator that tallies signals arriving as electrical pulses.’⁴ [Emphasis added.] Thus, messages to and from the brain are relayed, moving from one neuron to another.

It is difficult to understand how anyone can believe that the nervous system, particularly the brain, could have been produced by evolutionary randomness and selection. We have barely touched on some of the electrical design present in the rest of the body. The truth is that scientists are always discovering more about its workings, since its complexity, which far surpasses anything produced by man, is nothing short of a miracle. Truly we can say with David, ‘I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are marvellous and my soul knows it very well’ (Psalm 139:14).

How do our nerves transmit information?

A nerve fibre is actually an extension of a single nerve cell.

The inside and outside of most of our cells are bathed with fluid containing positively and negatively charged ions (e.g. sodium Na⁺; potassium K^+; chloride Cl^_). Using complex biological ‘pumps’, the cell’s machinery is able to transport positively charged ions through the (semi) permeable membrane, with the end result being that there is a slight excess of negatively charged ones inside. This means there will be an electric potential across the membrane, so that the inside and outside are like the positive and negative poles on a battery, i.e. it is polarized (Fig. 1).

If something causes the membrane to suddenly become more permeable at one spot, the resulting flow of positive ions back into the cell causes the charge differences to cancel out at this point—i.e. , the membrane will become depolarized there (Fig. 2).

This depolarization then spreads sideways, like a wave, along the cell wall, i.e. along the nerve fibre. The message in our nerve fibres is not transmitted by an electric current as such, but by a wave of depolarization (Fig. 3). The cell’s biological pumps restore the electric charge to the membrane behind the path of the wave.

A number of things—mechanical or electrical stimuli, or chemical effects—can cause this temporary increase in permeability. Where one nerve fibre A makes contact with another B at what is called a synapse, the arriving wave causes the release of special transmitter chemicals from tiny containers. These chemicals cause depolarization in B at that contact point, so starting a new wave of depolarization going in the same direction. Once released, the transmitter chemicals have to be broken down almost instantly, otherwise B would stay depolarized, and unable to build up charge ready for the next ‘firing’.

Organophosphorus insecticides (e.g. malathion) work by preventing this breakdown, thus the insect’s nerve cells cease to function properly. Because our nerve fibres use the same transmitter chemicals, malathion is poisonous to humans if exposed to enough of it.

This whole cycle of charge, discharge, chemical release, breakdown, and remanufacture, can happen several hundred times per second. Even with this very simplified description, it is clearly an astonishing process. The information to plan and make all this is stored in code on our DNA, the material of heredity. We really are fearfully and wonderfully made! Return to text.

• Fingertip control
• The paradoxical urinary concentrating mechanism

References and notes

1. Shepherd, G.M., Neurobiology, Oxford University Press, London, p. 577, 1983. Return to text.
2. Tortora, G.J. and Anagnostakos, N.P., Principles of Anatomy and Physiology, Harper & Row, New York, p. 290, 1981. Return to text.
3. Gitt, W., The Wonder of Man, CLV Publishing, Germany, p. 82, 1999. Return to text.
4. Restak, R.M., The Brain, Bantam Books, New York, pp. 34–35, 1984. Return to text.

[Ignjatije]

Koja je uloga resice u grlu?

Valjda da spreči ulazak u organizam mikroba, virusa i bakterija.

A koja je uloga bradavica kod muškarca ?

[grigorije22]

Badly designed arguments—‘vestigial organs’ revisited Published: 17 December 2011(GMT+10)

Photo Wikipedia

The argument from ‘vestigial organs’ has been refuted many times by creationists, but some evolutionists still think it is a good argument against creation. Halldór M. from Iceland writes:

Greetings, I was wondering if you could write an article that refuted this article here: [Web link removed as per our feedback rules—Ed.].

Not sure how scientific they are or if their information is accurate but it seemed like a very updated version of the vestigial argument for evolution.

Kind regards,

Halldor M.

Iceland

CMI’s Lita Cosner replies:

Dear Halldor,

I’ll take these ‘useless organs’ one at a time. Sometimes the author of the list didn’t use the proper name; when that’s the case, I’ll use the author’s name for it in quotes, with the proper name in parentheses.

Human Vomeronasal Organ: The contention that there is no possible function of the human VNO is unsupported.¹

stock.xchng

 

Extrinsic ear muscles: To quote from a Journal of Creation article (read the whole article at The plantaris and the question of vestigial muscles in man):

“While virtually all of the larger muscles of the body have obvious (as well as some not so obvious) mechanical functions, smaller muscles are not necessarily useless. For example, two of the smallest muscles in the body, the stapedius and the tensor tympani, serve to dampen the movements of the auditory ossicles and the tympanic membrane (respectively) preventing loud sounds from overloading these delicate structures of the middle ear. In general, most small, short muscles of the body produce fine adjustments in the movement of larger muscles.

“One of the problems with the whole concept of vestigial or functionless muscles is the well-known fact that unused muscles quickly degenerate. People ranging from astronauts exposed to a prolonged weightless environment, to those confined to long bed rest, lose a significant amount of muscle mass in only a few months. In short, muscle mass is a matter of ‘use it or lose it’. It is unlikely that any muscle that was virtually unused for the lifetime of an individual (to say nothing of generations of individuals over millions of years) would remain as healthy muscle tissue. It seems overwhelmingly likely that any muscle in the body that actually exists in the present, serves some function.”

 

It is in principle not possible to prove that an organ is useless, because there is always the possibility that a use may be discovered in the future.

 

A CMI biologist suggested that one function of ear muscles could be to help remove wax from the ears. When a person is chewing, or smiling, etc. the ear muscles move the ears. This gradually moves the wax outwards, cleaning the ears. But there could be other functions also.

Wisdom teeth: Wisdom teeth almost exclusively cause problems in countries where the diet consists of soft foods. Through most of human history, the average diet consisted of foods which required more work to chew, resulting in better jaw development with more room for the teeth. See Are wisdom teeth (third molars) vestiges of human evolution?

“Neck” (or cervical) ribs: I would consider something that develops in only 1 of 200 people and causes problems when it does to be pathological and a result of abnormal development. In short, an example of human devolution, rather than evolution.

“Third eyelid” (plica semilunaris): This is one of the places where the author of the list shows his/her ignorance. The plica semilunaris actually has a critical function for the health of the eye. It secretes the sticky substance that hardens into the crust we sometimes find around our eyes when we wake up. This substance surrounds any particles that find their way into the eye, making them less likely to scratch the eye, and making it easier for the tears and eyelids to remove the particles from the eye. If we didn’t have this organ, our eyes would be much more prone to painful injuries that would affect our sight, and also make us more susceptible to related infections.

Darwin’s point: To quote another Journal of Creation article (Vestigial arguments: remnants of evolution):

“‘Darwin’s point’ is a cartilaginous bump on the rim of the outer ear found in about 10% of humans. This is an autosomally dominant trait with incomplete penetration, and is ‘thought to be the vestige of a joint that allowed the top part of the ancestral ear to swivel or flop down over the opening to the ear.’

“Spinney follows plastic surgeon Anthony Sclafani of the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary in New York City, arguing that the genetics of the Darwin’s point condition suggest that it is an evolutionary vestige:

“‘The trait is passed on according to an autosomal dominant pattern, meaning that a child need only inherit one copy of the gene responsible to have Darwin’s point. That suggests that at one time it was useful. However, it also has variable penetration, meaning that you won’t necessarily have the trait even if you inherit the gene. “The variable penetration reflects the fact that it is no longer advantageous,” Sclafani says.’

“However, this is merely twisting genetics into an evolutionary tale. Autosomal dominant traits can arise through mutations and either have no functional importance (such as the widow’s peak) or are harmful (such as Huntington’s disease), so it does not have to be functional to have any sort of dominance. Rather, the combination of autosomal dominance and incomplete penetration suggest that it’s a mutation, but it does not affect the survival of the organism. And since it is a dominant trait, it is able to find its way into the population more readily than a mutation that gives rise to a recessive allele. Therefore, Darwin’s point merely provides at best an example of natural variation and at worst an example of genetic degeneration, neither of which is a problem for the biblical worldview.”

Subclavius muscle: The Wikipedia description (at the time of writing) of the muscles function says that it carries the shoulder downward and forward, and draws the clavicle inferiorly as well as anteriorly. In addition, in the event of a fractured clavicle (the clavicle is the most frequently-fractured long bone), the subclavius muscle protects the brachial plexus and the subclavian muscles.

This hardly seems vestigial to me! The comments on the unlikelihood of the survival of vestigial muscles above also apply here.

Palmaris (longus) muscle: While this muscle is highly variable, and its absence (in around 10% of the population—most frequently in Caucasian people but less frequently in other populations) isn’t associated with a measurable loss in grip strength, the fact that it isn’t badly atrophied in the people who possess it indicates that it has some use. (See also Selfish gene theory, the ENCODE project and vestigial muscles)

Male nipples: The existence of male nipples is attributable to design economy—both boy and girl babies develop from a common blueprint, with hormones controlling the development of sex-specific traits. It is unclear whether male nipples are useless, however. They’re full-sized, equipped with blood vessels and nerves—in other words, they have everything a functioning organ has. The most commonly-cited possible purpose for them is sexual stimulation. See Male nipples prove evolution?

Erector pili: These muscles, found in all mammals, are what causes someone’s hair to stand up when cold or frightened. The hair can trap more air when it stands on end, so forms an insulating layer to help to retain heat. Evolutionists say that humans have so little body hair now that the erector pili muscles are useless. But muscle contraction in and of itself helps to retain body heat, and they also have an important role in keeping the skin’s oil glands unblocked. See Blind fish, island immigrants and hairy babies.

Appendix: This old evolutionary stand-by has long been shown to have a vital purpose, especially in early childhood. It’s a storehouse of the ‘good’ bacteria that populate the intestines and which are essential for digestion. See Appendix: a bacterial safe house and More musings on our useless appendix.

Body hair: This person’s list acknowledges the eyebrows’ function in keeping sweat out of the eyes (eyelashes are also useful for keeping debris out of the eyes). In addition, hair on the top of the head is useful for insulation (a great deal of body heat is lost out of the top of the head) and protection from sunburn. On other parts of the body, hair may have a sensory function; hair movement is transferred to sensory nerves within the skin. And as mentioned earlier, hairs keep the pores in the skin open and healthy, allowing movement of oils onto the skin from the glands at the base of the hairs.

Plantaris muscle: The plantaris has an unusual number of proprioceptive receptor end organs, so it probably plays a role in proprioception. And it does weakly aid in plantarflexion of the ankle joint and flexing of the knee joint. (The plantaris and the question of vestigial muscles in man)

Thirteenth rib: It is unclear whether this condition is referred to distinct from the cervical ribs above; apparently this is a different condition as it is said to affect 8% rather than 5% of the population. But again, this could be attributed to a developmental anomaly (when people are born with six fingers, no one claims it is some sort of evolutionary ‘throwback’).

Male uterus/female vas deferens: These, while they make up two entries on this person’s list, only merit one entry, because their cause is the same. In the earliest stages of development, a baby develops the beginnings of both the male and female reproductive systems. Hormones determine which system develops fully. Rarely, hormones can cause the wrong system to develop partially, resulting in some level of gender ambiguity. This is not an example of vestigiality; no evolutionist would argue that humans were at some point androgynous.

Fifth toe: The fifth toe provides width and flexibility to the foot while walking barefoot. Problems with the fifth toe largely arise from wearing shoes that fit improperly.

Pyramidalis muscle: Again, see the comments about the unlikelihood of the survival of truly vestigial muscles. Just because a muscle is minor doesn’t mean it is useless. This muscle helps to strengthen the rectus sheath.

Coccyx: The underappreciated tailbone actually has a couple important functions. It is an anchor point for several muscle groups, and removal of the coccyx can cause difficulty in sitting or standing up, difficulty in giving birth, and incontinence.

Paranasal sinuses: I have never heard anyone argue that our sinuses are useless before! Many roles have been suggested for them, including lightening the weight of the front of the skull, increasing resonance of the human voice, insulating the sensitive dental roots and eyes from the rapid temperature changes in the nasal cavity, and humidifying inhaled air.

 

The creation model allows for deterioration of a perfect creation.

 

In short, not one of the items on the list fits the definition for a truly vestigial organ.

However, there are two principles that need to be stated about the very concept of vestigial organs, an idea that has been very destructive of scientific progress (why research something that is deemed useless?):

First, it is in principle not possible to prove that an organ is useless, because there is always the possibility that a use may be discovered in the future. This has happened with over a hundred alleged useless vestigial organs which are now known to be essential.

Second, even if the alleged vestigial organ were no longer needed, it would prove devolution not evolution. The creation model allows for deterioration of a perfect creation. However the particles-to-people evolution model needs to find examples of nascent organs, i.e. those which are increasing in complexity.

Sincerely,

Lita Cosner

[Arsenija]

Ovi nedostaci pokazuju da ljudski organizam nije inteligentno dizajniran,

 

0110_hahaha

[Odahviing]

0110_hahaha

 

Pa ili pokazuju da nije inteligentno dizajniran ili da dizajner nije sveznajuć, nepogrešiv i svemoćan

[Justin Waters]

Pa ili pokazuju da nije inteligentno dizajniran ili da dizajner nije sveznajuć, nepogrešiv i svemoćan

Mah, problem stvara ovo "inteligentan" pa onda ako kazes da nije inteligentno dizajniran, ispada da mislis da je glupo dizajniran, sto nema blage veze sa zakljucivanjem.

Dakle za gdjicu Laru i njenu moc razumjevanja, nije dizajniran vec evoluiran.

[Sudija]

Najveci nedostatak je starenje tela! Nemam nista protiv da umrem od starosti ali hocu da uvek izgledam kao da imam 25 godina bez obzira sto imam 100 godina i da ne gubim snagu zbog starosti. .smesko.

[distancirana]

Ja ne vidim nikakav propust na sebi...:P

[RYLAH]

Мени криво што немам ласерске очи. То би било баш супер кад бих имао ласерске очи. Ласерским очима бих могао да спржим оног Станка што ми није вратио иљаду динара већ годину дана.

 

Ех, туго...

[Avocado]

Да. У фосилном запису се види да је клима некада била другачија и много бујнија.

 

U geološkom zapisu se vidi da se klima mnoooogo puta menjala... pa je između ostalog vegetacija nekad bila bujnija a nekad i manje bujna nego sada...

 

 

Елем, ови тзв. пропусти не морају да значе да је човек створен несавршен. Шта то савршен уопште и значи ? Само Хришћанство учи да је једино Бог савршен и да у Њему јединоме нема промена. У извештају о Стварању се каже да је творевина ствовера "добро веома", а не савршена. У самом том извештају се спомиње и промена твари након пада, као и након Потопа. Немогу се неке аномалије у природи користити као аргумент против Божијег стварања из Библије. И када се буквалистички гледа на Стварање, оно само говори о негативним променама у творевини.

 

Када смо ми и свет око нас по Божијој вољи онда те аномалије или пропусти уопште не морају имати негативан ефекат. Здрава храна и хигијена усне дупље и зуба уништава бактерије. Без напада од стране животиња и људи, и пажљивим кретањем неће бити повређене очи. Без превилког кретања и рада нећемо оштети хрскавицу. Без повреда нема бола... 

 

Problem sa tezom o "inteligentnom dizajnu" nije u tome što čovek nije savršen, već u tome što postoje očigledno neinteligentna rešenja, krajnje nelogična za inteligentnog dizajnera a opet sasvim očekivana usled prilagođavanja tj. evolucije.