The woodpecker tongue couldn't have evolved

From EvoWiki

Contents 1 Claim 2 Source 3 Responses 4 Fallacies contained in this claim 5 External Links 6 Related claims 7 See Also 8 Acknowledgments

Claim

The unique arrangement of the woodpecker's tongue could not have evolved. If the tongue started anchored to the back of the beak, it would require a large sudden change to get to its present configuration.

Source

• Juhasz, David. The Matrix of Life Exposed: Woodpeckers. Retrieved on 2008-06-02.

Responses

1. A possible stepwise evolution, as well as full dissertation, can be found here. Many of the proposed steps in that evolution appear in living avians, demonstrating their viability.
2. The inability to find a detailed explanation for the evolution of the woodpecker tongue does not demonstrate how the structure is actually a divine miracle or that the mechanisms of evolution are incapable of generating the complexity of the structure.
3. Creationists who use this claim fail to notice that:
   • Not all woodpeckers have long tongues, such as the sapsuckers, who feed by lapping up sap that ooze out of the holes they bore, rather than licking out wood-boring insects that live inside trees.
   • The tongues of juvenile long-tongued woodpeckers are short, given as how they must rely on their parents to lick insects out of wood for them, and their tongues grow longer as they mature.
4. The inability to find a detailed explanation for the evolution of the woodpecker tongue does not invalidate the detailed explanations of the evolution of other animal lineages, including dogs, cats, lizards, and horses.
5. add responses

Fallacies contained in this claim

• Argument from incredulity (I can't understand how, so it can not be)
• Suppressed Evidence (of proposed evolutionary steps, steps appearing in living avians, short-tongued woodpeckers)
• False Dilemma (disproving woodpecker evolution does not prove creation)
• Hasty Generalization (one unanswered question does not disprove evolution)

External Links

• Mark Isaak's page for this claim [1]
• Ryan, Rusty, 2003. Anatomy and Evolution of the Woodpecker's Tongue. [2]
• Anatomy and Evolution of the Woodpecker's Tongue

Related claims

• Complex organs couldn't have evolved
• The eye is too complex to have evolved
• The ear is too complex to have evolved
• The brain is too complex to have evolved
• The bombardier beetle is too complex to have evolved
• Butterfly metamorphosis is too complex to have evolved
• The giraffe neck couldn't evolve without a special circulatory system
• Organs and organ systems would be useless until all parts are in place
• Snake venom and hollow fangs couldn't have evolved simultaneously
• Sex can't have evolved

See Also

• Why is Creationism not a Scientific Theory?

Acknowledgments