The argument that will never die, vestigial organs, is back with a vengeance in a video that (at the time of this writing) has 6.9 million views and was released by Vox Media last Thursday. In the video, the argument is made that evolution is proven within your own body because we can find things within our own bodies that, in a evolutionist model, may have possibly been used for something when human beings were lower primates.
It needs said that it’s plainly absurd to assume a scientific model, impose that model on findings, claim those findings have no other explanation, and then point to those findings as “proof” of the model you assumed to begin with. No one has ever actually observed species to species change, nor demonstrated why some extinct species are the evolution of a non-extinct less developed species. More importantly no one even bothers to ask why (for example) a “water breathing” animal would have a survival advantage when he mutates to breath oxygen. Not to mention how such a mutant finds another with the same mutation to breed with, let alone how such a mutation is not only passed on one time, but cultivated. But, none of that matters when a God-hating culture is desperate to throw accolades your way for making it easier to hate God; and therefore you don’t have to answer those questions. After all, wild speculation about the origin of wiggling your ears will do just fine.
You know, too often us Creationists are called morons, stupid, and other pejoratives because we won’t accept what is commonly held to be true. Somehow, I suppose, it became scientific to NOT be a skeptic. Somehow, it became scientific to just go along with everyone else. Right now, any evolutionist reading that statement is screaming “THAT’S NOT TRUE” believing himself to be that very skeptic, that romanticized rebel with a Bunsen Burner. And such anger is easy when you aren’t the one facing expulsion or loss of tenure for daring to postulate that one of the greatest designed machines in existence (the human body) may possibly have a designer or that perhaps some folks are wrong and the Earth isn’t actually getting warmer. It’s easy to believe lies about yourself when you are in safety.
Comfort and ease often begets not only laziness, but conformity as well. Let it be a warning and a lesson to us all.
Nonetheless, I believe strongly that wrong popular arguments must be rebuffed as long as they are popular; for no other reason than that they are popular. Simply put, we are not winning the minds of those who watch, produce, and support videos like this. While we have won these arguments time and again, it is far more important to win minds than arguments. Let there be no doubt: The evidence and reality of creation is all around us, and those who deny that must frame the question and ignore logic to continue suppressing the truth.
In case you haven’t seen the sorry excuse for science, here it is:
Early in the video, we find their thesis:
“Look closely and you’ll see parts that aren’t there because you need them, but because your animal ancestors did.”
Right away, we see this is fraught with problems. How do we know our animal ancestors needed them? Do you know who our animal ancestors were, what they did, how they behaved? The evolutionist will answer that we do know because we can see things in us which, they claim, no longer have a use. Inherit in that statement is two presumptions:
1) We are certain there is no use for these things.
2) We can be certain what the use was in an entirely different species never once observed or documented to exist.
An evolutionist may quibble with my use of the word “certain”, emphasizing that they believe it to be “more than likely” or “most plausible”. However, this video claims to be “proof”. Proof means certainty. It’s that certainty that sinks them.
The truth is we don’t know what these extra parts are for, and therefore it is impossible to be “certain”. In fact, I would argue that their video not only makes evolution less “certain” but less plausible as well. One theory is that we used to be an entirely different species and this stuff is left over. Another is that they serve a human purpose we don’t yet understand. The first theory assumes we have a complete understanding and know a lot, the second assumes we don’t yet understand everything and know little. Which sounds more plausible to you? Especially considering the fact that we’ve been down this road before.
It’s important to note the supporting statement made in the video for their thesis:
“These remnants of our deep history, only make sense within the framework of evolution by natural selection.”
Follow the logic:
1) We have stuff that seems to be of little to no use. (So far so good.)
2) It must have had a use in the past. (Why the past? Why can’t it, like fins in salmon and appendixes in humans, have a use we don’t yet understand?)
3) Therefore we used to be a different species. (There is, literally, nothing that concludes we used to be anything different. Pointing to things we don’t yet understand and IMPOSING a theory upon them is not science, but rather, wishful thinking.)
At this point, the video goes on to document a number of “vestigial” muscles and traits in human beings. For the sake of space, I won’t go into a defense against their biased claims here. Suffice to say, most of the time I don’t know why we have a certain muscle or why the human body acts a certain way. Newsflash: no one does. Anyone who then says such data (and lack thereof) proves anything is participating in rhetoric and has stopped being a scientist.
For example, when you say that muscles most can’t use attached to our outer ears are stimulated when a sound is made to their side (left muscles to sounds to the left, right to right), that’s a good observation. When you say this means that we once were a different species that turned its ears towards sound like cats do, that’s a baseless assertion. There are a million possibilities why the muscles may tense but you’ve focused in on one reason that requires the exclusion of all other reasons and also requires the assumption of a number of other unproven claims.
This kind of shoddy work is the result of years of complacent, boastful arrogance within the scientific community. Science has become an echo chamber that constantly affirms the intelligence and righteousness of the scientist who toes the line, and exists within a culture that makes such persons the arbiters of right and wrong. We must resist this behemoth and instead, as Christians and Creationists, embrace independent thinking. It falls to us to remember that right and wrong, true and false, do not submit, nor are not determined by popular opinion. It falls to us to realize that thinking out of the box is not only useful, but vital. For those who can think for themselves -who truly can think for themselves- videos like this must be seen as increasingly desperate and perilously foolish. Most importantly, we must have the courage and intellectual ammunition to say exactly that.