If you still have teachers that tell you gill slits and the hind limb bones in whales are vestigial, they are lying to you. They are not slits but folds of skin that have nothing to do with breathing. I have friends that have several of those folds of skin on their chin, and they can’t breath through any of them but the top one.
The so-called hind limb bones in whales are not connected to the vertebral column, nor is there any evidence they ever were. If they tell you they are useless vestiges that serve no function, maybe they aren’t really lying, they just don’t know very much about whale anatomy. These bones are organ anchors. The whales cannot reproduce without them.
You have probably been taught that our tailbone is a useless vestigial organ also. Don’t have the surgery to have it removed, you have nine muscle groups attached to it, and you’ll find out within 24 hours why you needed it.
You probably still believe in those pictures of all those fetuses from different life forms that look so much alike in the early stages. Those were proven to fraudulent over 100 years ago. The actual fetuses don’t look anything like that. Sorry to confuse you folks with facts. There are many more such distorted “facts” in the textbooks. Too bad they aren’t required to be accurate.
Copyright © 2016 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.
Gallup, Inc. maintains several registered and unregistered trademarks that include but may not be limited to: A8, Accountability Index, Business Impact Analysis, BE10, CE11, CE11 Accelerator, Clifton StrengthsExplorer, Clifton StrengthsFinder, Customer Engagement Index, Customer Engagement Management, Dr. Gallup Portrait, Employee Engagement Index, Enetrix, Engagement Creation Index, Follow This Path, Gallup, Gallup Brain, Gallup Business Journal, GBJ, Gallup Consulting, Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, Gallup Management Journal, GMJ, Gallup Panel, Gallup Press, Gallup Tuesday Briefing, Gallup University, Gallup World News, HumanSigma, HumanSigma Accelerator, ICE11, I10, L3, ME25, NurseInsight, NurseStrengths, Patient Quality System, Performance Optimization, Power of 2, PrincipalInsight, Q12, Q12 Accelerator, Q12 Advantage, Selection Research, Inc., SE25, SF34, SRI, Soul of the City, Strengths Spotlight, Strengths-Based Selling, StatShot, StrengthsCoach, StrengthsExplorer, StrengthsFinder, StrengthsInsight, StrengthsQuest, SupportInsight, TX(R+E+R)=P3, TeacherInsight, The Gallup Path, The Gallup Poll, The Gallup School, VantagePoint, Varsity Management, Wellbeing Finder, Achiever, Activator, Adaptability, Analytical, Arranger, Belief, Command, Communication, Competition, Connectedness, Consistency, Context, Deliberative, Developer, Discipline, Empathy, Fairness, Focus, Futuristic, Harmony, Ideation, Includer, Individualization, Input, Intellection , Learner, Maximizer, Positivity, Relator, Responsibility, Restorative, Self-Assurance, Significance, Strategic, and Woo. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. These materials are provided for noncommercial, personal use only. Reproduction prohibited without the express permission of Gallup, Inc.
Creation vs. Evolution - Reason vs. Religion
The popular media often portrays the creation vs. evolution debate as science vs. religion, with creation being religious and evolution being scientific. In an ironic twist, it's the creationists who have a solid empirical basis for their theory, while the evolutionists are left clinging to their convictions by faith.
Is it reasonable to acknowledge a Creator? When challenged by skeptics to prove the existence of a Creator scientifically, Dr. Wernher von Braun, the "Father of the American Rocket and Space Program," replied, "Must we really light a candle to see the Sun? …The electron is materially inconceivable, and yet it is so perfectly known through its effects that we use it to illuminate our cities, guide our airliners through the night skies and take the most accurate measurements. What strange rationale makes some physicists accept the inconceivable electron as real, while refusing to accept the reality of a Designer on the ground that they cannot conceive of Him? …The inconceivability of some ultimate issue (which always will lie outside scientific resolution) should not be allowed to rule out any theory that explains the interrelationship of observed data and is useful for prediction."  To simply dismiss the concept of a Creator as being unscientific is to "violate the very objectivity of science itself."  While we may not be able to comprehend knowledge of a Creator, we certainly can apprehend it.