The ICR is still publishing poor arguments against "evolution". Here's one by Jerry Bergman from the latest Impact magazine, titled "Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve Is Not Evidence of Poor Design":

http://www.icr.org/article/recurrent-laryngeal-nerve-not-evidence/

Bergman tries to argue against the fact that a long loop in the laryngeal nerve is unnecessary and evidence of poor design, but is actually an example of good design in humans. He completely ignores the fact that a competent "designer" wouldn't tolerate an extra 3-4 meters of nerve length in giraffes, and of course, ignores most of the arguments given by people like Donald Prothero in Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters.

Bergman's grasping-at-straws arguments are almost comical.

AlanF

AlanF wrote:The ICR is still publishing poor arguments against "evolution". Here's one by Jerry Bergman from the latest Impact magazine, titled "Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve Is Not Evidence of Poor Design":

http://www.icr.org/article/recurrent-laryngeal-nerve-not-evidence/

Bergman tries to argue against the fact that a long loop in the laryngeal nerve is unnecessary and evidence of poor design, but is actually an example of good design in humans. He completely ignores the fact that a competent "designer" wouldn't tolerate an extra 3-4 meters of nerve length in giraffes, and of course, ignores most of the arguments given by people like Donald Prothero in Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters.

Bergman's grasping-at-straws arguments are almost comical.

AlanF

Also a classic case of an "own goal" or shooting oneself in the foot.

What's next? Piles are good for you? Hiccups and chocking on food is evidence of god's benevolence?? Back ache is good for the soul??? Perineum tearing during childbirth proves women's moral inferiority and there punishment from the Benign master builder sky-wanker?

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH, AND TERRIBLE ENGINEERING IS GOOD DESIGN!

So, his argument is basically that it needed to be this way to ensure that the fetus was fully operational at every part of it's development?

Why woulnd't you just design the whole fucking thing more effectively to start with?

Rediculous.

HAJiME wrote:So, his argument is basically that it needed to be this way to ensure that the fetus was fully operational at every part of it's development?

Why woulnd't you just design the whole fucking thing more effectively to start with?

Rediculous.

It's odd how an omnipotent deity is limited to working within such arbitrary constraints, isn't it?

Here are some observations on Bergman's arguments. I'm not a biology type, but even I can see how stupid these are.

Bergman first quotes Prothero:

Bergman quoting Prothero wrote:that examples of"poor or at least very puzzling design can be accumulated endlessly," thus proving evolution, with one of the best examples being "the recurrent laryngeal nerve, which connects the brain to the larynx and allows us to speak." "In mammals, this nerve avoids the direct route between brain and throat and instead descends into the chest, loops around the aorta near the heart, then returns to the larynx. That makes it seven times longer than it needs to be."1

Bergman then argues against this:

Bergman wrote:Although the laryngeal nerve does not take the shortest route to the larynx, this is also true for many other nerves.

Some of which are further examples of poor design, others of which are pretty much non-sequiturs.

Bergman wrote:The optic nerves do not take the shortest route to the occipital lobe of the brain (the lobe near the back of the head), but rather cross over at the optic chiasm (where the two tracts cross over in the form of an "X") for reasons now known to be based on good design. The nerves from the right side of the brain go to the left side of the body (except for the right and left frontal branches of a facial nerve, which are supplied by both sides of the brain) also for good reasons.

A non-sequitur. The optic nerves do indeed take the shortest path -- to where they need to go. Of course, so far as I know, it's not well understood why the brain is organized this way.

I'm sure that if the optic nerves looped around the salivary glands before diving back into the brain Bergman would find a way to claim "good design".

Bergman wrote:Likewise, the left RLN has a different anatomical trajectory than one would first expect,

Duh. Exactly the problem

Bergman wrote:and for very good reasons. In contrast to Prothero's claim, the vagus nerve (the longest of the cranial nerves) travels from the neck down toward the heart, and then the recurrent laryngeal nerve branches off from the vagus just below the aorta (the largest artery in the body, originating from the left ventricle of the heart and extending down the abdomen). The RLN travels upward to serve several organs, some near where it branches off of the vagus nerve, and then travels back up to the larynx.2

That's essentially what Prothero said, so Bergman is again grasping at straws. Perhaps Bergman thinks that the technicality that the laryngeal nerve is bundled with the rest of the nerve fibers in the vagus nerve up to where it branches back around is somehow an argument. On second thought, no, he's just grasping at his straws.

Bergman wrote:This is the reason it is called the left recurrent laryngeal nerve. In contrast, the right laryngeal nerve loops around the subclavian artery just below the collarbone, and then travels up to the larynx.

Exactly the problem again!

Bergman wrote:Of note is the fact that the longer left RLN works in perfect harmony with the right laryngeal nerve, disproving the faulty design claim.

LOL! A fine example of bait and switch. The point Bergman is supposed to be arguing against is that the extra length of the nerve shows poor design. The fact that the left and right laryngeal nerves work properly together is completely irrelevant.

Bergman then shoots himself in the foot:

Bergman wrote:Reasons for This Design

The most logical reason is that the RLN design is due to developmental constraints. Eminent embryologist Professor Erich Blechschmidt wrote that the recurrent laryngeal nerve's seemingly poor design in adults is due to the "necessary consequences of developmental dynamics," not historical carryovers from evolution.3

Well glory be! Developmental constraints! That's exactly what Prothero and others have shown, from the fact that the structural complex developed from one of the gill arches in early fish, and development from fertilized egg to adult form follows essentially the same topological path in all animals. The nerve is logically placed in fish, but developmental constraints (due to evolution) force the developing nerve to remain in the same topological relation to the other structures as they move down into the chest cavity in mammals and so forth.

Bergman continues with such ridiculous and self-defeating argumentation, and it's not worth any more time to go over it.

AlanF