Jabin said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Jabin said:

---

Quote:

---

Whales have leg bones?

---

Can you provide more on this assertion?

---

A quick google search will show that whales and dolphins have these bones.

---

I did that search, quickly. It seems that the primary "leg" bones are actually pelvic bones which are not vestigial but are used in birthing. There are a couple/few tiny bones as well that may be vestigial or, like many other supposedly vestigial items, have a use of which we are not yet aware. I was wondering if I missed something because those two examples don't really seem to support much at all. I also did not spend a whole lot of time researching the issue.

---

Again, as a disclaimer, I am not a biologist. I'm sure there are others out there that can provide better descriptions.

Vestigial structures are remnants from previous ancestors which perform no function or perform a function greatly reduced from its original purpose. And, one of the keys to vestigial structures, is that we observe them in other species in their more developed form and performing different functions.

In humans, we have wisdom teeth, tailbone, and ear muscles. The appendix is a critical part of the digestive system for a lot of animals, but mostly useless in humans. Whatever role it serves now is trivial since it is routinely removed.

Whales and dolphins have pelvic bones, snakes have remnants of hind limbs, flightless birds and wings, blind cave dwelling fish and amphibians have non functioning eyes, dewclaws on dogs, I think there are lots of different examples. There are also plants that make stamens that don't produce pollen or serve any role in pollination and plants that have similar vestigial items.

While some of these structures may serve some purpose or may be partially functional, the idea is that the species has evolved in a way to rely less and less on that structure for what its original purpose was. The pelvic bones in whales may serve some purpose, but nothing like what its original purpose was. The ears muscles in human is a simple one, but one I think demonstrates the idea well. Many mammals have developed auricular muscles that are used for turning their ears in different directions. Think of a fox that can fully rotating its ears over 150 degrees. The exact same muscles the fox uses to rotate those ears can be found in humans, but they are so under-developed as to only really function is a novelty 'wiggling of your ears'.

Structures like these fit nicely within the idea of biological evolution on large scales. If biological evolution is true, then these fleeting vestigial remnants are expected. In a scenario where we are designed, one would expect efficiency. Why give humans wisdom teeth that simply get removed or an appendix that serves as a bigger liability than an asset? Why give cave fish eyes that aren't functional?

I don't discredit the argument that we may not fully understand what some of these supposedly vestigial structures do. . . . however, I think there is an obvious 'God of the gaps' trap here.

You need to do a bit more research on the organs and muscles you claim are vestigial. Specifically, the ear muscles and coccyx in humans have very important roles, albeit different than roles they may play in other species.

Millions of years of random evolution produced the human brain /dumbasses