Polygamy justification?

[Indy Coug]

I can also see why some fish that would venture on the land would gradually develop more effective terrestrial limbs and lungs (admittedly I have a tough time seeing how gills could ever develop into lungs even over the course of millions of years).

You can thank the lung fish for that. It all began one summer day when the mud pool began to get a little low and almost certain death awaited until that thunder bumper rescued Gil. Gil thought to himself, "Self, you need a plan B, so the next time you get to spray paint an egg cluster, think lungy thoughts".

[Indy Coug]

Really? Even though after all that time humans still get a big FAIL for tolerance?

So what happens when perchance humanity finally gets that group hug? Where do we go from there?

[LA Ute]

The thought occurred to me at that point that I simply couldn't imagine something like that just evolving on its own.

I am not really into the evolution issue - I am in the God-was-the-guiding-hand-but I-don't know-exactly-how He-did-it camp. Even so, I have always liked to think about the implications of something I heard a while ago. Supposedly, when many small animals (birds, rodents, etc.) are about to be killed by a predator, their bodies are flooded with endorphins as a sort of pain avoidance, which essentially knocks them out just as the end comes. Someone will probably do a Snopes check and prove me wrong, but if that's true, I like to think of it as something a merciful Creator would install in the creatures. I can't think of any natural selection reason for it.

Just a somewhat idle and speculative thought, which I do not advance as any kind of proof of intelligent design, just as something pleasant to contemplate.

[Jarid in Cedar]

I just don't see how a highly specialized item like a worm-like appendage on a turtle's tongue ever begins to develop. Did turtles with small bumps on their tongues start wagging them around and get more food millions of years ago, so the turtles with small bumps were more successful?

Usually, something like that is considered to be a genetic anomally that first appeared pretty much as it does today, the first lucky turtle with that genetic defect soon was out competing the other guys for food and his genetics were passed to larger numbers of off spring

I can also see why some fish that would venture on the land would gradually develop more effective terrestrial limbs and lungs (admittedly I have a tough time seeing how gills could ever develop into lungs even over the course of millions of years).

From a very simplistic standpoint, a gill is an inverted lung, water is the carrier of oxygen versus air. I don't have any clue who first punched the fishes gill outside in though.

[woot]

I was watching a nature program several years ago that showed an animal called the alligator snapping turtle. This species of turtle has developed a long, thin fleshy appendage on its tongue that looks exactly like a worm. The turtle wags the worm-like appendage around and catches fish with it.

The thought occurred to me at that point that I simply couldn't imagine something like that just evolving on its own. I just don't see how a highly specialized item like a worm-like appendage on a turtle's tongue ever begins to develop. Did turtles with small bumps on their tongues start wagging them around and get more food millions of years ago, so the turtles with small bumps were more successful? Why did those turtles ever develop the bump in the first place? Why can't I come up with a different example that doesn't have so much sexual imagery?

It's easy to see how less-camouflaged moths that don't blend it with bark on common tree in an area would die more often before reproduction than other moths with better camouflage- hence the moths over time develop better camouflage to the point that they sometimes perfectly match the background of places they frequently reside. I can also see why some fish that would venture on the land would gradually develop more effective terrestrial limbs and lungs (admittedly I have a tough time seeing how gills could ever develop into lungs even over the course of millions of years).

While I can't speak to the worm-tongue specifically (although I imagine that you are correct in that even a very small version of it would have provided help in catching food), I can say that there are many of these out there, and as much as some like to submit that a characteristic is "irreducibly complex," there has never been anything shown to be such. Bacterial flagellum, eyes, wings, etc., all have advantages without being fully formed.

Also note that gills and lungs are not homologous. The homologue of lungs in most fish is in fact the bladder of air used for increasing and decreasing depth while swimming. Gills developed independently.

[Jarid in Cedar]

While I can't speak to the worm-tongue specifically (although I imagine that you are correct in that even a very small version of it would have provided help in catching food), I can say that there are many of these out there, and as much as some like to submit that a characteristic is "irreducibly complex," there has never been anything shown to be such. Bacterial flagellum, eyes, wings, etc., all have advantages without being fully formed.

Also note that gills and lungs are not homologous. The homologue of lungs in most fish is in fact the bladder of air used for increasing and decreasing depth while swimming. Gills developed independently.

Woot is more correct on the lung development, I was having fun

[woot]

I am not really into the evolution issue - I am in the God-was-the-guiding-hand-but I-don't know-exactly-how He-did-it camp. Even so, I have always liked to think about the implications of something I heard a while ago. Supposedly, when many small animals (birds, rodents, etc.) are about to be killed by a predator, their bodies are flooded with endorphins as a sort of pain avoidance, which essentially knocks them out just as the end comes. Someone will probably do a Snopes check and prove me wrong, but if that's true, I like to think of it as something a merciful Creator would install in the creatures. I can't think of any natural selection reason for it.

Just a somewhat idle and speculative thought, which I do not advance as any kind of proof of intelligent design, just as something pleasant to contemplate.

Wouldn't a rush of endorphins help your fight or flight response? While it may not help small creatures as they are swallowed whole, it certainly helps those who are able to participate in a fairer fight for longer as they are not as bothered by pain.

[SoonerCoug]

Someone will probably do a Snopes check and prove me wrong, but if that's true, I like to think of it as something a merciful Creator would install in the creatures. I can't think of any natural selection reason for it.

So you think that God might have used evolution, but also might have put some "merciful Creator things" into our DNA?

Have you thought of a natural selection reason for male nipples? Do you think that might be a "merciful Creator thing" too? I have this theory that it's somehow related to garment markings.

I'd also be fascinated to ask God to explain why he chose to give human semen the ability to coagulate, which creates a "soft plug" and prevents subsequent males from impregnating a woman.

[SeattleUte]

So what happens when perchance humanity finally gets that group hug? Where do we go from there?

Snide comments like this make me confident the sun will extinguish first. I'm sure families of the 100 million slain by governments in the 20th century or of the martyrs to liberty this week in Iran don't see this as a matter of PC excess, nor would they laugh at your "joke.". You've always struck me as the archetypical devout Mormon, and you are not flattering of your faith. This is the primary reason why I would like to see an official LDS apology and accounting for its past racism and apartheid, as well as a repenting for ongoing oppression of women and gays--to teach a profound lesson to you and the majority of LDS who, it seems, are like you.

[Indy Coug]

Snide comments like this make me confident the sun will extinguish first. I'm sure families of the 100 million slain by governments in the 20th century or of the martyrs to liberty this week in Iran don't see this as a matter of PC excess, nor would they laugh at your "joke.". You've always struck me as the archetypical devout Mormon, and you are not flattering of your faith. This is the primary reason why I would like to see an official LDS apology and accounting for its past racism and apartheid, as well as a repenting for ongoing oppression of women and gays--to teach a profound lesson to you and the majority of LDS who, it seems, are like you.

100s of millions of slain were not in the result of intolerance. There were times when intolerance was used as a rallying cry, but at its barest essentials were nothing more than a power grab at all costs or maintenance thereof.

The LDS theology of becoming as God (and all of His qualities) and to participate in the creation and exaltation of other beings in perpetuity is infinitely more lofty, rewarding and enobling than simply stopping at Boardwalk and not passing Go.

[beelzebabette]

Snide comments like this make me confident the sun will extinguish first.

I actually thought it was a really good question.

to teach a profound lesson to you and the majority of LDS who, it seems, are like you.

Quoted without comment for my own amusement.

[SeattleUte]

I actually thought it was a really good question.

Quoted without comment for my own amusement.

Here is a prime example of the lack of civility in this forum that is a concern to many of the community.

[byu71]

Snide comments like this make me confident the sun will extinguish first. I'm sure families of the 100 million slain by governments in the 20th century or of the martyrs to liberty this week in Iran don't see this as a matter of PC excess, nor would they laugh at your "joke.". You've always struck me as the archetypical devout Mormon, and you are not flattering of your faith. This is the primary reason why I would like to see an official LDS apology and accounting for its past racism and apartheid, as well as a repenting for ongoing oppression of women and gays--to teach a profound lesson to you and the majority of LDS who, it seems, are like you.

Oppression of women and gays?? Could you define such oppression. Perhaps a short definition and then an example.

[beelzebabette]

Here is a prime example of the lack of civility in this forum that is a concern to many of the community.

That I agreed with Indy or that I recognized that I was among those you consider to be in need of the profound lesson you mentioned but didn't want to quote your full post?

[SeattleUte]

100s of millions of slain were not in the result of intolerance. There were times when intolerance was used as a rallying cry, but at its barest essentials were nothing more than a power grab at all costs or maintenance thereof.

The LDS theology of becoming as God (and all of His qualities) and to participate in the creation and exaltation of other beings in perpetuity is infinitely more lofty, rewarding and enobling than simply stopping at Boardwalk and not passing Go.

If you really understood what I mean by tolerance I think you would appreciate that tolerance would preempt the evil motives you describe. Yes, it is intolerance that steels a man to execute multitudes in service of his tribe or flag. Whatever motivates the leaders, they are not the ones who pull the triggers or flip the switches.

A fantasy of humans (men?) as gods in embroyo will not bring about a wordwide group hug. You're deluded. In any event, this is no more a Mormon doctrine than the priesthood ban. When did you last hear about it in conference or see it in a Gospel Doctrine manual? Is it in the D&C or the Book of Mormon? Harold Bloom and others have blown a passing phrase in the King Follett Discourse out of proportion.