sparc
Posts: 1469
Joined: April 2007
|
| Quote (Kattarina98 @ June 09 2012,09:38) | David Tyler lies and quote-mines for Jesus in "Design perspectives and the physiology of walking".
| Quote | | The authors recognise that the morphology and action they are studying is unusual among cursors, and this leads them to make a design inference. The hypothesis is that there are physiological reasons for the design of the human foot (rather than the structure being a spandrel and a witness to evolutionary tinkering). |
His quote from the paper: | Quote | | Any inference of function from a single evolutionary origin must be treated with caution. However, the mechanical form of the human foot, based on the interpretation of function presented here, suggests adaptation for economical walking from both the whole body mechanics and muscle physiology perspectives. |
Should I trust him - no way! I went to the paper. And that's the original text:
| Quote | | Any inference of function from a single evolutionary origin must be treated with caution. However, the mechanical form of the human foot, based on the interpretation of function presented here, suggests adaptation for economical walking from both the whole body mechanics and muscle physiology perspectives. This economical form of walking may have arisen in the hominin lineage as far back as Australopithecus afarensis (approx. 3.6 Ma). This is supported by the presence of a transverse and longitudinal arch [42] and evidence of a fully extended bipedal gait [43], together with early stance heel-strike [4,44] in A. afarensis. |
Of course, there is no design inference throughout the text. I guess Jesus is not amused, David - lying is a sin.
Bolding added by me. |
With 50% IDiots/creationists this country will never understand football.
ETA: I mean football not this strange game where something remotely resembling a ball is mostly carried and thrown.
Edited by sparc on June 10 2012,14:53
--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."
- William Dembski -
|
