(November 11, 2013 at 7:31 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote:(November 6, 2013 at 6:58 pm)orogenicman Wrote: This assumes, of course, that symmetry and asymmetry are not a part of the natural world, which, of course, is a poor assumption. Crystal symmetry, for instance, is a direct reflection of its atomic structure, a perfectly naturally explainable phenomenon. Symmetry in biological organisms is a balanced distribution of body parts, but that symmetry is not perfect. If is was, when I divide my face into two parts vertically in a photograph and mirror them, I would not get the exact same facial appearance that I would get from the original face. That is because the environment often shapes that symmetry. For instance, I could have a scar on my right side that doesn't exist on my left side, or even better, I could have a deformity that causes my left cheek bone to sit higher up on my face than my right cheek bone. I could have a drooping eyelid on one side and not the other. These are not design features, and neither is the original symmetry, which is a function of natural selection.Actually this proves intelligent design
while overall near-symmetry is a matter of beauty
differences proves that it is not nature which formed it (like fingerprints for example or inner organ non-symmetrical positions and shapes)
No, it doesn't prove anything!
It is part of the greater theory of evolution by natural selection.