Posted on 07/22/2009 11:10:13 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Peacock tail tale failure
by David Catchpoole
The peacock’s spectacular fan-like tail, complete with patterns that look like eyes, has all the hallmarks of having been designed—by a Designer.
So it’s hardly surprising that the difficulties of explaining this by evolution evidently presented a ‘headache’ to Charles Darwin. To be precise: ‘The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!’ Those were his exact words which he wrote in 1860,1 the year after he published his (in)famous Origin of Species. It wasn’t until 1871, eleven years later, that Darwin proposed his ‘theory of sexual selection’ in an effort to provide a naturalistic (evolutionary) explanation for peacock feathers and other ‘seemingly useless’ male ornaments.
(To find out how science has falsified yet another Darwinian prediction, click the link below)...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Ping!
That isn't the complete title of Darwin's work.
Thanks for the ping!
Yeah, they tend to leave off the rest of it out of fear of connection with eugenics and racism.
We are about to be made a complete marxist dictatorship by the POSOTUS (yes...I said POSOTUS), and you are content to try to drive a wedge between conservatives with your luddite crap....
smooth move.
Very true, when they left out the bit about the preservation of the “most favoured races.” It’s good to be reminded of where Darwin’s head was at from time to time!
Just like creationists tend to leave out the part where Darwin said eugenics would weaken the human race.
An interesting article, but it is possible that the criteria used by the research team to judge tail quality might not be the same as those used by peahens.
And just assuming that peahens DO prefer longer, and more-eyed peacock tail feathers, where did that preference come from?
Why do I prefer redheads to blondes, for that matter?
Does the evolutionary clock need every gear?
Survey says XXX!
The only Luddites on this forum are those who acknowledge that biology is the study of super-sophisticated bio-nano machines that appear to be designed for a purpose, but then turn around and say that it's all just an illusion created by random processes plus survival, all the while punishing any scientist who dares to point to the obvious designs in nature.
Tell me, can you tell which one of those brains are yours, or do they all look alike to you now?
Or Christy Brinkley, Billy Joel!
Every gear??? The Evos are losing the large gears, the small gears, the springs, the weights, and everything in between. Indeed, about all that’s left is the case, and even that’s falling apart!
Well, I certainly prefer Christy to Billy, Anyday. She is a gorgeous woman, and Billy is a troll who can sing.
That’s always a possibility. Maybe the peahens think that while the peacocks with the big, colorful, more-eyed tails make great conversationalists, they are too squishy and flamboyant to be considered serious mating material :o)
Yes, and we all know why they do not use the full title. The whole ‘favored races’ issue and the fact Darwin basically used junk science to encourage and foment racism. Certainly gave Hitler and others who love eugenics a nice cover.
It also shows that Darwin was doing science in reverse; having a preconceived end and then selecting the science that proves it.
I think you mean intelligent design, summed up here:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.