At breakfast this morning, the example of the 6-fingered hand was more clearly explained to me (I’m sorry, but all I can think about right now is Princess Bride, but I’ll try to continue). Apparently, it was supposed to answer a creationist criticism: “What good is half an ear or only a part of the eye…those systems can not logically form over time, but need to appear all at once in order to be truly helpful to the species.”
So the example of the six-fingered hand is supposed to illustrate that a mutation can appear immediately, without the form needing to slowly develop. While I appreciate the clarification, it doesn’t seem to help a whole lot. In the case of a hand, the body is already programmed with the information it needs to grow fingers–in other words, they are not a “new development”–the DNA already exist for fingers to grow. However, if a species doesn’t already have an eye, this example doesn’t explain how it suddenly appears without any previous information to copy or mutate.
I’m sure that there are many more detailed critiques of this position, but thought I’d do a quick update between sessions.
“This little piggy went to sit through another session…”
How about . . . “And this little piggy reaches the F in the Cmaj11…”
Two extra fingers could be very beneficial for a clasical pianist; however, my understanding is that the extra fingers are never fully functional because one would the additional muscles and nervous system to support them. Just another delima for the evolutionists.