{"id":144,"date":"2010-11-17T21:01:04","date_gmt":"2010-11-18T03:01:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/?p=144"},"modified":"2010-11-17T21:01:04","modified_gmt":"2010-11-18T03:01:04","slug":"laryngeal-nerve-designed-or-evolved","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/2010\/11\/17\/laryngeal-nerve-designed-or-evolved\/","title":{"rendered":"Laryngeal Nerve &#8212; designed or evolved?"},"content":{"rendered":"<!-- Easy AdSense V2.80 -->\n<!-- Post[count: 1] -->\n<div class=\"ezAdsense adsense adsense-leadin\" style=\"float:right;margin:12px; \"><script type=\"text\/javascript\"><!--\r\ngoogle_ad_client = \"pub-9726323159676378\";\r\n\/* 250x250, created 10\/4\/09 *\/\r\ngoogle_ad_slot = \"0910926813\";\r\ngoogle_ad_width = 250;\r\ngoogle_ad_height = 250;\r\n\/\/-->\r\n<\/script>\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\"\r\nsrc=\"http:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/show_ads.js\">\r\n<\/script><\/div><p>An interesting argument made against life being designed is the path of the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve (RLN.) If life was designed why would God take such an un-optimal path for the nerve &#8212; especially as seen in the giraffe?<\/p>\n<p>The claim is that if you look at the RLN in fish you&#8217;ll see a more direct path, and as species evolved this nerve just got wrapped up and ended up taking a very indirect route below the heart. It makes sense, it looks like we can simply say &#8220;evolution did-it tm&#8221; and shrug it off. However, before we do that let&#8217;s think how un-useful that is towards our knowledge of biology. If we look at this &#8220;junk DNA&#8221; and say evolution did-it, we hinder our progression in science. It&#8217;s more interesting and useful to first assume there is a plan behind it and figure out why it is the way it is. That&#8217;s what we did with &#8220;junk DNA&#8221; and it ended up not being junk!<\/p>\n<p>Even if I believed macro evolution was true (which I don&#8217;t,) I wouldn&#8217;t say that the indirect path of the LN was caused from it. How can evolution pay attention to such details like our eye lashes and eye brows yet take such a strange path for the LN? Just like most other things with evolution (like vestigial organs, junk DNA, eyes being wired backwards (http:\/\/www.icr.org\/index.php?module=articles&amp;action=view&amp;ID=1742), etc.) it will probably end up going against the Darwin theory.<\/p>\n<p>So what are some possibilities behind this RLN? I have heard some good ideas, check out <a href=\"http:\/\/www.icr.org\/article\/recurrent-laryngeal-nerve-not-evidence\/\">http:\/\/www.icr.org\/article\/recurrent-laryngeal-nerve-not-evidence\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p>As a computer programmer I try to relate code to biology. I may look at code that someone else wrote and wonder why the heck they did that. I may even go as far as rewriting what they wrote trying to improve it only to find out that once my new elegant code is executed I discover major bugs. Then further digging reveals that what the original author did had an elegant purpose. I have the same view with life. Until we&#8217;re at the point where we can design life ourselves we should be very skeptical about un-optimal design. I am willing to bet that if we designed a giraffe from the\u00a0embryonic stage to adult life with a short RLN we would find some very serious bugs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>An interesting argument made against life being designed is the path of the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve (RLN.) If life was designed why would God take such an un-optimal path for the nerve &#8212; especially as seen in the giraffe? The claim is that if you look at the RLN in fish you&#8217;ll see a more [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-144","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-evolution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/144","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=144"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/144\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":147,"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/144\/revisions\/147"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=144"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=144"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bibledunamai.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=144"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}