Vestigial Organs

Vestigial Organs are compromised versions of organisms that appear fully functional in evolutionary ancestors but lost most, if not all, of their original function. Evolution works with tinkering existing features instead of working from scratch. Such organs clearly show a transition from one species' structure to another.

Permanently Covered Eyes The Blind Mole Rat, Cave Salamander and Mexican Tetra are all blind yet their eyes are not damaged or flawed. So why are they blind? Simple, their skin covers their eyes. Unlike most creatures that have eyelids which can open and close, these little creatures don’t have such luxuries. Their eyes are permanently encased behind a solid layer of flesh making vision impossible. Where is the intelligent design in that? That’s like a camera with a lens cap that isn’t designed to come off. These are not primitive eyes or mere light sensitive cells. They are fully developed complex eyes just like that of any other mole, salamander or fish. The actual reason for this is that these creatures spend virtually all of their time with little to no exposure to day light. As generations have passed their eyelids evolved to completely cover the eye permanently. Since their eyes were no longer need without exposure to light they become entirely covered by skin so its sensitivity would no longer be irritated by the dirt.

Flightless Beetles There are many examples of flightless beetles, such as weevils. These beetles have perfectly formed wings that were common in past ancestors. As with other beetles they also have wing covers on their back but these flightless beetles are flightless because their wing covers are permanently fused shut, rendering the wings useless. Where is the intelligence of designing a creature with useless wings that are permanently trapped inside its body?

Dandelions Dandelions self-reproduce by means of apomixis and do not reproduce by fertilization like most other living organisms. Despite this they still have flowers and produce pollen, both of which are sexual organs used for sexual fertilization. Where is the intelligences in designing a plant the produces pollen when it has no need for pollen?

Dewclaws Have you ever noticed the extra claw that appears to be sticking out the side of a dog's leg? It is called a dewclaw and almost all dogs, cats, wolves and tigers have them. What are they for? Nothing, they are a useless extra claw that is usually so high up they don’t even touch the ground when running. They almost always have very little bone or muscle structure and are far too weak structurally to be used for anything like gripping, digging or attacking. On some dogs it's so much in the way that it's surgically removed. Where is the intelligence in design a useless extra claw sticking out of animals’ leg? The actual reason this claw exists is that canines and felines don’t walk on their feet; they actually just walk on only their toes. Evolutionary ancestors to these creatures did walk on their feet and these claws were actual and useful toes and claws for these ancestors.

Flightless Wings Several species of birds are flightless but still have wings. Some still use their wings for balance when running or help with swimming but others have little use of their wings. The part that makes one question the claim of an intelligent designer is that the wings retain complex structure that is specifically intended for flight and mirrors the wing anatomy of birds that are capable of flight. Commonly the reason these birds can fly is because their wings are too small in comparison to their body weight. The wings of other flightless birds like the Cassowary are visible externally only as a few long and stiff quills. Most of its wing's skeletal structure is found under the skin making the complex frame work of its wings useless. Why would an intelligent designer use the complete structure of wings from flying birds in birds where the mass majority of the wing's structure is not needed? For the record all of the flightless birds that exist today evolved from flying birds, thus why they still retain the same wing structure.

True Human Tails Scientists have actually discovered the tail genes inside the human genome. Humans contain both the gene to develop tails along with apoptosis (programmed cell death) that plays a significant role in removing the tail while humans are still in the embryo form. The tail genes are retained from distance ancestors to humans and apoptosis was adapted later during the course of our ancestors' evolution. If humans were design by a supposed "intelligent designer" then where is the intelligence of designing both the gene to grow tails and apoptosis to destroy it? Why not just not have the tail gene in the first place? Not to mention that sometimes apoptosis fails causing the tail gene to successfully produce a human tail. Learn More »

Embryos The embryos of all humans start to grow gills early in their development. The same is also true with the embryos of all other mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians since we all share a common ancestry with fish. There is a specific gene in our DNA that tells our embryo to start developing gills, but before the gills are complete another gene later kicks in telling the gills to form into various other structures. The gills on human embryos are not fully developed or used for respiration but neither are the gills of a fish embryo at that age. The gills are still actually legitimate gills, in their early stages, as the slits do establish contact between the outside and the pharynx. The early stages of development for the gills in human embryos mirrors that of fish embryos. It is not until that later gene (which got added to our DNA later in our evolutionary history) kicks in that the gill development takes a different course than that of fish. Learn More »

Male Breast Tissue & Nipples Where is the intelligence of designing men with nipples? For some men they may play a small role in sexual stimulation and for very few they can even lactate but for most they are useless. Besides limited to no purpose one cannot ignore the fact that they can even be dangerous as cancer can grow in both male and female breast tissue. Anyone who believes in intelligent design really needs to weigh out the reward of some sexual stimulation and insufficient lactation compared to the dangerous risks of cancer. With all the other means of sexual stimulation out there and more impressive party tricks than male lactation it is obvious that the threat of cancer is not worth it. So why do men have breast tissue and nipples? Does evolution try to claim that man descended from an all female species or that man originally breast feed children? No, obviously that is not the case. In actuality all of us start out with female characteristics, it is not until a later stage of fetal development that the testosterone causes sex differentiation in a fetus. Breast tissue and nipples on males are left over from the earlier stages of our birth that were not fully removed. Why wouldn't a designer who was supposedly intelligent just have a male or female embryo from the start?

Small Toe If you stop to think about it your small toes are useless. They are not needed for balance and we don't use them when walking. In parts of the world where people go barefoot most of the time it is quite common for their small toes to go missing because of an accident or disease yet their mobility is not hindered at all. What is so intelligent about having an extra and useless toe on our feet? If a designer wanted a fifth toe on each foot to mirror the five fingers on our hands it would have been far more intelligent to have made that extra toe useful and functional. Distant ancestors to humans had more developed small toes as having a fifth digit was useful for climbing trees. Their feet served as extra hands much like that of chimpanzees. As our ancestors stopped living in trees and became bipedal our toes and feet adapted to the new life style. On the other hand, our hands are still used for gripping, hence why our little fingers have not been compromised at all.

Plantaris Muscle The plantaris is a pencil-sized muscle in the back of our ankles. In humans this muscle is withered away and doesn’t even reach the toes but rather it disappears into the Achilles tendon. Sometimes it is even completely absent in people. The functionality of this muscle is so extremely limited that the loss of it has no effect. Not only is it not needed but like any muscle it can still rupture causing pain due to torn fibers or swelling. Why would a designer who was supposedly intelligent put an unneeded muscle in our ankle that resembles a withered away version of the plantaris muscle in other primates? This muscle was useful to humans' distance ancestors and is still useful for tree climbing primates. In them the muscle is fully developed and is able to cause all five toes to flex at once which is very useful when swinging from tree to tree and grasping.