Re: What my tiny little brain was thinking... [was Re: [asa] Two Amino Acid Difference in Gene May Explain Human Speech]

From: David Campbell <>
Date: Fri Nov 13 2009 - 18:36:10 EST

> To give a specific instance; We can take Cameron Whybrow's repeated appeal
> to the avian lung and put these questions (together with my answers - which
> may simply betray a degree of ignorance - thus proving that my mental
> incapacity is, indeed, the problem...);
> 1) Does Cameron claim that the avian lung MUST be a consequence of direct
> divine action ('de novo' creation)? - NO

But popularly marketed ID does claim that various things MUST be a
consequence of direct divine action. What Cameron is advocating and
what people in the pews are being sold is quite different.

> 2) Is he wrong to claim that nobody in mainstream biology has an adequate
> evolutionary account of this organ? - NO

"Adequate" is problematic here. The avian lung system seems to have
been present in a wide range of dinosaurs, so it is not inextricably
linked to flight (not to mention pterosaurs (as far as is known) and
bats flying without a similar feature). It seems to have evolved as a
way to have a strong but lightweight skeleton and as a more efficient
lung. Full details of every mutation involved are not in hand, no
more than are full details of every direct divine event invoked by ID.

The avian lung system is complicated. But that alone is not good
reason to doubt that it could evolve without miraculous help.
Unfortunately, that principle, if accepted, eliminates most of ID.

Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 13 18:36:51 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 13 2009 - 18:36:51 EST