scigirl

Ok Vanderzyden - you continually have claimed that 1) you are here to civilly discuss science and have enlightening discussions and 2) we are mean.

Well here's another chance for you to prove #1 true, and I'll attempt to not be mean. In fact, I'll be the opposite of mean – which in this case, is boring!

Here's some pubmed abstracts that I found regarding the evolution of the fetal circulatory system.

Now my bent is slightly different than the last thread. Instead of focusing on evidence for suboptimal design, I simply wish to show that the design of our heart – good or bad – shows an evolutionary history. No matter who “designed” the heart, it is clear that they did a halfway decent job, since it IS an amazing organ. However, the development of this organ should indicate something about its creator, right? Let’s see what the heart has to say:



Look how similar all of our hearts look in development? Why do we see this similarity?

Ok here’s a challenge for you – I found several articles which may demonstrate proof of evolution, via heart development. Pick a favorite article or two, we will both get the full text and read them, then debate the science involved.

Which one appeals to you?

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=120274 31&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Control of cardiac development by an evolutionarily conserved transcriptional network.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=119927 18&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">A Twist in fate: evolutionary comparison of Twist structure and function.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=118077 31&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The structure and function of the helical heart and its buttress wrapping. II. Interface between unfolded myocardial band and evolution of primitive heart.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=109730 66&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Genetics of heart development.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=107810 41&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Inversion of the chordate body axis: are there alternatives?</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=107204 35&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Developmental patterning genes and their conserved functions: from model organisms to humans.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=100997 02&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Evolution of the vertebrate cardio-pulmonary system.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=913662 6&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Left-right asymmetry in vertebrate embryogenesis</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=782725 5&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Patterns of form and function in developing hearts: contributions from non-mammalian vertebrates.</a>
<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=782725 4&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The evolution of efferent vagal control of the heart in vertebrates.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=304719 2&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Evolutionary origin of cardiac malformations.</a>

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=635203 2&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Evolution and the cardiac patient.</a>

Note: I left out the abstracts because this post was becoming too long.

scigirl

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

*bump*

Blinn

Do I smell a formal debate? Does scigirl have time for that? Would Vanderzyden be able to stay on topic?

fleetmouse

Let's cut to the chase. First he'll say that you're deluded by the legacy of Haeckel, who has been shown to be a fraud.

Then he'll say that the similarities are the result of a common designer.

Then he'll say that any perceived imperfections are the twisted criticisms of atheists who want to deny God.

I'm only surprised that he hasn't done the "imperfections were introduced by the fall" thing.

Then he'll say something unbeleivably rude, pompous and condescending, and after getting toasted for it, claim that we're practicing ad hominems and not addressing the substance of his posts. Then he'll stomp out in a huff and add more people to his List of Unworthy People to Ignore.

Enjoy!

FM

Vibr8gKiwi

Doesn't matter what his argument is, once refuted he'll simply claim it wasn't refuted and move on to attacks and other distractions.

scigirl

Ok ok let's keep this thread on topic please - since I'm actually making an effort to give Vanderzyden the benefit of the doubt.

No more formal debates! That was not my offer - sorry! Just a debate here at E/C, that's all.

scigirl