Dear @jwamshop,
No, I don't mean atoms. I am speaking of elements.
Elements are each of more than one hundred substances that cannot be chemically interconverted or broken down into simpler substances and are primary constituents of matter. Each element is distinguished by its atomic number, i.e., the number of protons in the nuclei of its atoms.
Examples of elements:
H - Hydrogen
He - Helium
Li - Lithium
Be - Beryllium
B - Boron
C - Carbon
N - Nitrogen
O - Oxygen
Seasons change but they are cyclical. The oxygen cycle, nitrogen cycle, hydrologic cycle, etc. are not random. Everything including solar systems, galaxies, life, etc. show design and purpose. They evidence that there is a designer who created them.
Same thing. Just a language barrier as we were previously talking about much larger chemical bonds and couldn't see what the creation of heavy "synthetic" atoms (or elements) had to do with it.
They can't be chemically interconverted, but they sure can be broken down or combined. That's how all elements except Hydrogen is created. Be it by gravity or by humans. Fusion and fission.
Of course they are not random. A ridiculous amount of Hydrogen in space will eventually assemble into stars, planets, solar systems and galaxies. There is no design necessary for that to happen, it's a logical consequence of physics.
Absolutely incorrect. None of the mentioned things show any traces of design, but show a logical growth of structure within their own domains' constraints.
Pure counter-examples of the lack of design and intelligence are such of the eye of an mammal, in which the nerves are on the wrong side of the eye, causing a blind-spot. Or the laryngeal nerve which in a comical way shows the "mishaps" of evolution when studying it in a Zebra. We can explain why the nerve looks the way it does because of evolution. Just like we can explain, say, suicidal animals.
There is no reason for an intelligent being to make these mistakes, there is also no reason why it the flaws need to be across species, and why all species are structured in such order that it looks exactly as if they had evolved into being, rather than being creatively designed.
Nature doesn't contain anything that points at being created through design, intelligence or any after thought, except for the actual creations by a number of animals, of which we are the most capable in doing so. At least at this time of the earth's history.
Dear @jwamshop:
Vocal cords in the larynx are innervated by the right and left laryngeal nerves. These nerves branch off of their respective vagus cranial nerves. On the left side, the vagus nerve travels from the skull, down the neck, toward the heart, and then past it. The recurrent laryngeal nerve branches off from the vagus just below the aorta. Looping under the aorta, the RLN then travels upward (or recurs) to serve several organs as it travels up to the larynx. Evolutionists see poor design in the fact that the left nerve does not branch off closer to the larynx. (It should be noted that even though the left RLN is longer than the right nerve, signals to each nerve are adjusted so that the vocal cords are stimulated simultaneously so normal speech is produced.)
This is NOT poor design:
Investigations at Johns Hopkins Medical School found that during development, “the left vagus nerve and its recurrent laryngeal branch form a sling supporting the distal (or ductus arteriosus component) of the left sixth aortic arch.” Remarkably, these researchers found in their study that:
The media [composition of the blood vessel wall] of the ductus arteriosus beneath the supporting nerves is thinner and has less elastic fiber formation than the elastic lamellar media of the adjacent aortic arches. The study shows that the vagus and recurrent laryngeal nerves are in a position to provide mechanical support to the ductus arteriosus during its development and that the morphology [or composition] of the media of the supported ductus arteriosus differs from that of the adjacent unsupported aortic arches. It is suggested that this local mechanical support may be the reason that the normal ductus arteriosus differentiates as a muscular artery and is therefore able to obliterate its lumen in postnatal life. Without such support the ductal media could develop the abundant elastic fibers characteristic of the normal unsupported aorta and pulmonary trunk and become an abnormal, persistently patent [or open] ductus arteriosus [not a good situation].
Developmental research shows how the RLN should be seen as a wise mechanism, designed to provide the right supporting conditions during a baby’s development for the ductus arteriosus to form correctly. There are multiple purposes for this nerve beyond activating the left vocal cord. Its length, location, and function all point to ingenious—not poor—design. The assertion that its position in our body is due to a remote fish ancestry is yet another colossal evolutionary blunder.
Sadly, this claim is much like the other arguments against an all-knowing Creator which have been proven false by science; such as so-called vestigial organs (supposedly useless organs) like the tonsils, appendix, and wisdom teeth, which all have function and purpose.
Blessings. Steven
Dear @jwamshop,
Concerning your argument that the nerves of a mammal are on the wrong side of the eye:
In the eye, light-processing optimization requires 1) a mechanism to detect light, 2) a quick replenishment of that light-detecting mechanism to enable its extended use in large quantities of light, which tends to destroy tissue, 3) the removal of heat from the highly metabolic process before the heat destroys protein function, 4) the removal of heat from light focused on the retina, and 5) the prevention of light reflecting inside the eye after it passes through the photoreceptors.
To optimally balance these major factors so the retina can work properly - The photoreceptors must be inverted and embedded in the retinal pigment epithelium, a cell layer just outside the retina.
This vital tissue removes waste and helps remove heat from the rapidly regenerating receptors. Its black granule pigment prevents light-scattering. The choroid’s extensive network of blood vessels supports the high metabolic needs of photoreceptors and functions like a car radiator to absorb additional heat.
Researchers have known for decades that the “uninsulated” nerve fibers leaving the photoreceptors spread apart, making this layer light-transparent. In addition, retinal Müller cells conduct light from front to back like fiber optic cables. One paper described their remarkable properties: “The increasing refractive index together with their funnel shape at nearly constant light-guiding capability make them ingeniously designed light collectors.”This enables the light-sensitive molecules to detect light regardless of which way the retina is oriented.
One research study simply concludes, “The retina is revealed as an optimal structure designed for improving the sharpness of images.”
Another account extolls the eye’s extraordinary performance: “Photoreceptors operate at the outermost boundary allowed by the laws of physics, which means they are as good as they can be, period.”
Simply put, if our eyes were built according to evolutionists’ expectations, we’d all be blind.