| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"SJAB1958" |
| Date: |
23 May 2007 05:09:53 PM |
| Object: |
Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
23 May 2007 07:11:56 PM |
|
|
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
I didn't know this, but now I'm fascinated. :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron O" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
23 May 2007 07:47:02 PM |
|
|
On May 23, 7:11 pm, wrote:
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
I didn't know this, but now I'm fascinated. :)
The best that we have figured out is that vertebrate testes evolved in
cold blooded aquatic animals. The sperm making process is heat
sensitive (when it evolved it didn't have to deal with high body
temperatures). All extant vertebrates seem to be stuck with this
limitation, and deal with it in various ways. Some warm blooded
vertebrates do things like circulate colder blood around the testes.
Others like humans just dangle them outside the body cavity so that
they are cooler than the rest of the body. It is sort of a Rube
Goldberg fix, but it works. This is why wearing tight bikini shorts
can lower fertility in men. The intelligent designer made them dangle
for a reason and it wasn't to snag on thorn bushes.;-)
Ron Okimoto
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cemtech" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 07:55:56 PM |
|
|
In article <1179958193.110181.94600@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
balfres@hotmail.com says...
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
I'd like to add some.
6) Goosepimples. What a useless reaction. Now if our hair was longer
and thicker (yes, we have as many hairs as a chimp), they it would act
like a good insulator.
7) Eye design. What idiot puts the cables IN FRONT OF THE LIGHT
RECEPTORS!?! Now where do the cables go but to all meet in one spot and
go through the wall, creating a blind spot. This causes both a loss in
resolution, and the need to poke a hole for all the cabling to go
through.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vend" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 12:45:33 PM |
|
|
On 24 Mag, 00:09, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Doesn't seem a problem. Any additional outlet is a potential point of
infection.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
And the problem is?
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
Actually, there are two.
AFAIK, kidney failure is not the most common problem in humans.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
The prostate gland doesn't enlarge until senility. Planned
obsolescence perhaps?
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Ok, this seems a good example.
AFAIK, birds have internal testicles despite their body is warmer than
ours.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
Yes :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 01:34:23 PM |
|
|
On 24 May, 18:45, Vend <ven...@virgilio.it> wrote:
On 24 Mag, 00:09, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Doesn't seem a problem. Any additional outlet is a potential point of
infection.
Care to check out the fact that a particular virus I have already
mentioned happily lives in the urinary tract and is the major cause of
cervical cancer in women, and in the majority of such cases the virus
has been transmitted to the woman from the male urinary tract.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
And the problem is?
Kidney failure causes all these functions to cease.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
Actually, there are two.
AFAIK, kidney failure is not the most common problem in humans.
It is more common than you think, for example one particular cause of
kidney failure affects 1 in 800 people in the world (the said
condition being autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease), I would
say that is very common indeed.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
The prostate gland doesn't enlarge until senility. Planned
obsolescence perhaps?
Well unless the majority of men in their 50's are senile that is were
you are wrong. 25% of men in that age group have an enlarged prostate,
and that only covers the ones that are diagnosed.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Ok, this seems a good example.
AFAIK, birds have internal testicles despite their body is warmer than
ours.
Do you actually know the body temperature of the average avain
species, I would be grateful if you could advise me on that detail,
but I was actually referring to human males, not any other class or
family of animals.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
Yes :)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 12:00:35 AM |
|
|
On 24 May, 18:45, Vend <ven...@virgilio.it> wrote:
On 24 Mag, 00:09, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Doesn't seem a problem. Any additional outlet is a potential point of
infection.
Consider the primary cause of cervical cancer, a virus that lives in
the urinary tract.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
And the problem is?
Loss of any one of these functions is fatal. Loss of all five even
more so.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
Actually, there are two.
AFAIK, kidney failure is not the most common problem in humans.
One major cause of kidney failure is autosomal dominant polycystic
kidney disease, affecting around 1 in 800 people worldwide. I would
call that fairly common.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
The prostate gland doesn't enlarge until senility. Planned
obsolescence perhaps?
No, I have to disagree, 1 in 4 men in their 50's have enlarged
prostate glands, and as far as I know senility rarely - if ever -
affects men in their 50's.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Ok, this seems a good example.
AFAIK, birds have internal testicles despite their body is warmer than
ours.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
Yes :)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven J." |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
23 May 2007 11:49:58 PM |
|
|
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
There is a classic ID response and a classic, explicitly creationist
response, both of which have some problems from the standpoint of
apologetics.
ID proponents commonly argue that there are things that need
intelligence to do, even badly: the worst doggerel is as implausible a
result of "law or chance" as is a Shakespearian sonnet, and bad design
is still design. I'm not sure how they pitch that argument when
raising money from church audiences: "we have proof of a Creator, so
what does it matter that He's a total klutz?" Of course, a pure
"Designer of the Gaps" Who set evolution in motion, and just helped it
over certain hurdles with minimal fixes, could explain this: evolution
is responsible for the badness, and the Designer of the Gaps is
responsible for the actual design, done within constraints imposed by
evolution. Again, this has the problem of not going over very well
with the anti-evolutionists (not merely "anti-Darwinists") who pay the
bills for ID, and the additional problem of any GOTG argument: the
gaps may, upon investigation, turn out to be illusory.
Creationists, especially YECs, more typically attribute imperfections
in design to the Fall. The details of how this works have not, AFAIK,
ever been worked out in detail: e.g. from your own example, what were
the human reproductive systems like before the Fall? A cartoon on AiG
illustrated the problem with an unanswered question: why would
opossums "play possum" before the Fall, when there was supposedly
neither death nor predators to evade?
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
-- Steven J.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "snex" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
23 May 2007 05:21:09 PM |
|
|
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
the intelligent designer made us in his image. therefore he suffers
from these same issues.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 12:22:51 AM |
|
|
On 23 May, 23:21, snex <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
the intelligent designer made us in his image. therefore he suffers
from these same issues.
that is presuming the designer is male (see comment about 'she was
only joking')
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 12:16:14 PM |
|
|
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 11:48:39 PM |
|
|
On 24 May, 18:16, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.
I agree on that one too.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "skyeyes" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 01:03:22 PM |
|
|
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 11:50:59 PM |
|
|
On 24 May, 19:03, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
True indeed, and the major problem here being the size of the baby's
head in relation to the mother's vagina, in all others mammals it is
'just right' but in humans head too big for vagina, distress caused to
both mother and baby.
A very 'intelligent' design.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "noctiluca" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 02:24:47 PM |
|
|
On May 24, 11:03 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
http://litcandle.blogspot.com/2003/10/id-toons.html
#7 - Sub-optimal design
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 02:10:03 PM |
|
|
On May 24, 1:03 pm, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
If I were a more modest person, I would not now mention
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may02.html
On the bright side, the second one was much easier and we're all fine
here.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Father Haskell" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 12:10:24 AM |
|
|
On May 24, 3:10 pm, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 24, 1:03 pm, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
If I were a more modest person, I would not now mentionhttp://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may02.html
On the bright side, the second one was much easier and we're all fine
here.
We need to figure out how to pop them out about four months early,
then use artificial wombs to carry them to full term.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 01:16:23 AM |
|
|
On 25 May, 06:10, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 24, 3:10 pm, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 24, 1:03 pm, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
If I were a more modest person, I would not now mentionhttp://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may02.html
On the bright side, the second one was much easier and we're all fine
here.
We need to figure out how to pop them out about four months early,
then use artificial wombs to carry them to full term.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Why build an artificial womb? Why not grow a pouch?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Hutton" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 01:31:00 PM |
|
|
On 25-May-2007, Father Haskell <fatherhaskell@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 24, 3:10 pm, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 24, 1:03 pm, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time
now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they
inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of
'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this
as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the
male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated
urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
If I were a more modest person, I would not now
mentionhttp://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may02.html
On the bright side, the second one was much easier and we're all fine
here.
We need to figure out how to pop them out about four months early,
then use artificial wombs to carry them to full term.
Compared to the rest of the great apes, Hom. sap. neonates
are already 5-7 months premature*. I think evolution has
gone as far as it can in widening pelvic passages (without
crippling the mother) and making ultra-dependent neonates.
*IIRC S. J. Gould discussed this in one of his "Nature"
essays. The statement relies on markers like skull
closure, extremity ossification, & neonate abilities.
--
Martin Hutton
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Beagle3" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
24 May 2007 01:15:28 PM |
|
|
On May 24, 7:03 pm, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
And what can we infer about the Designer from that? Indeed, what can
we infer about It from Its creation in general? It's obviously not a
nice old guy with a beard, for starters. (Like Thomas Hardy, I prefer
It to He, for obvious reasons.)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Isaak" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 01:13:51 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:03:22 -0700, skyeyes wrote:
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
I'm no expert, but I think hyenas may be worse.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 02:57:26 PM |
|
|
On 25 May, 19:13, Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:03:22 -0700, skyeyes wrote:
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
I'm no expert, but I think hyenas may be worse.
And I am curious as to what problems the hyenas have in giving birth.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Hutton" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 10:11:39 PM |
|
|
On 25-May-2007, SJAB1958 <balfres@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 25 May, 19:13, Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:03:22 -0700, skyeyes wrote:
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
I'm no expert, but I think hyenas may be worse.
And I am curious as to what problems the hyenas have in giving birth.
"Imagine giving birth through your penis" [ouchie]
Read this article:
http://www.livescience.com/animals/060426_hyena_cubs.html
(This only applies to spotted hyenas).
From another article I read many moons ago:
It seems that the alpha-female's pseudo-penis is accompanied
by a scrotum filled with two lumps of adipose tissue. So,
as a fake male, the alpha-female can control the pack.
--
Martin Hutton
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "J.J. OShea" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
26 May 2007 05:39:30 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 25 May 2007 15:57:26 -0400, SJAB1958 wrote
(in article <1180123046.366413.158490@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>):
On 25 May, 19:13, Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:03:22 -0700, skyeyes wrote:
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
I'm no expert, but I think hyenas may be worse.
And I am curious as to what problems the hyenas have in giving birth.
Hyenas, especially spotted hyenas, are, umm, strange in a number of ways.
Quote, from Wikipedia:
"One unusual feature of the spotted hyena is that females have an enlarged
clitoris called a pseudo-penis. Female hyenas give birth, copulate, and
urinate through their protruding genitalia, which stretches to allow the male
penis to enter for copulation, and it also stretches during birth. The
anatomical position of the genitalia gives females total sexual control over
who is allowed to mate with them. Researchers originally thought that one of
the things that causes this characteristic of the genitals is androgens that
are expressed to the foetus very early on in its development. However, it was
discovered that when the androgens are held back from the fetus, the
development of the female genitalia was not altered. Other hyena species lack
this adaptation, making it a fairly recent one in the hyena line."
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyena>
I don't think any more need be said.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
26 May 2007 08:53:26 AM |
|
|
On 26 May, 11:39, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2007 15:57:26 -0400, SJAB1958 wrote
(in article <1180123046.366413.158...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>):
On 25 May, 19:13, Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:03:22 -0700, skyeyes wrote:
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
I'm no expert, but I think hyenas may be worse.
And I am curious as to what problems the hyenas have in giving birth.
Hyenas, especially spotted hyenas, are, umm, strange in a number of ways.
Quote, from Wikipedia:
"One unusual feature of the spotted hyena is that females have an enlarged
clitoris called a pseudo-penis. Female hyenas give birth, copulate, and
urinate through their protruding genitalia, which stretches to allow the male
penis to enter for copulation, and it also stretches during birth. The
anatomical position of the genitalia gives females total sexual control over
who is allowed to mate with them. Researchers originally thought that one of
the things that causes this characteristic of the genitals is androgens that
are expressed to the foetus very early on in its development. However, it was
discovered that when the androgens are held back from the fetus, the
development of the female genitalia was not altered. Other hyena species lack
this adaptation, making it a fairly recent one in the hyena line."
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyena>
I don't think any more need be said.
Further to the hyena issue, I did some digging of my own and came
across this little nugget:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE2DE1F3DF932A3575AC0A964958260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=print
Despite their virilized anatomy and domineering behavior, female
hyenas perform their feminine roles adroitly, managing to copulate
through a tiny opening in the clitoris and then give birth through
that same phallus-like organ -- unique activities that are made easier
by well-timed increases in estrogen to help the skin soften and
stretch.
And being that the female hyena's pelvis in relation to the cubs head
is much more accommodating, one could say that the hyena has evolved a
rather neat solution to their own bizzare anatomical set-up.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Isaak" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
26 May 2007 05:09:40 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 26 May 2007 06:53:26 -0700, SJAB1958 wrote:
On 26 May, 11:39, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2007 15:57:26 -0400, SJAB1958 wrote
(in article <1180123046.366413.158...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>):
On 25 May, 19:13, Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:03:22 -0700, skyeyes wrote:
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
I'm no expert, but I think hyenas may be worse.
And I am curious as to what problems the hyenas have in giving birth.
Hyenas, especially spotted hyenas, are, umm, strange in a number of
ways. Quote, from Wikipedia:
"One unusual feature of the spotted hyena is that females have an
enlarged clitoris called a pseudo-penis. Female hyenas give birth,
copulate, and urinate through their protruding genitalia, which
stretches to allow the male penis to enter for copulation, and it also
stretches during birth. The anatomical position of the genitalia gives
females total sexual control over who is allowed to mate with them.
Researchers originally thought that one of the things that causes this
characteristic of the genitals is androgens that are expressed to the
foetus very early on in its development. However, it was discovered
that when the androgens are held back from the fetus, the development
of the female genitalia was not altered. Other hyena species lack this
adaptation, making it a fairly recent one in the hyena line."
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyena>
I don't think any more need be said.
Further to the hyena issue, I did some digging of my own and came across
this little nugget:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE2DE1F3DF932A3575AC0A964958260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=print
Despite their virilized anatomy and domineering behavior, female hyenas
perform their feminine roles adroitly, managing to copulate through a
tiny opening in the clitoris and then give birth through that same
phallus-like organ -- unique activities that are made easier by
well-timed increases in estrogen to help the skin soften and stretch.
And being that the female hyena's pelvis in relation to the cubs head
is much more accommodating, one could say that the hyena has evolved a
rather neat solution to their own bizzare anatomical set-up.
Further digging, from _Dr. Tatiana's Sex Advice to All Creation_ by
Olivia Judson, pp. 205-206.
"The umbilical cord, however, is short--only eighteen cm. long. Once the
placenta detatches, the young hyena will asphyxiate if it is not born
promptly. But a baby hyena's head is too big to pass through the
clitoris. So when a mother gives birth the first time, the clitoris
tears to let the cub out. This is not just agonizing. It is often
lethal. Scientists estimate that more than 10 percent of females die the
first time they give birth, and more than half of firstborn cubs are
stillborn. (Paradoxically, since the clitoris never recovers from from
this trauma, subsequent births don't put the mother's life at risk.)"
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ashore" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
26 May 2007 08:07:11 PM |
|
|
Well, yes. Really, really problematic. But I can't help wondering
how we seem to have overcome these seemingly insurmountable problems
and have become the dominant species on this earth.
Call me lucky, I guess.
-AS
On May 24, 1:03 pm, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On May 24, 10:16 am, "louan...@yahoo.com" <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 23, 5:09 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
Over on the female side of the aisle, I submit:
1a) Length and location of the female urethra making repeated urinary
tract infections (in the absence of modern medicine and/or hygiene)
pretty much a given. UTI's can lead to kidney infections and even
death fairly easily without modern etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -
My 2 cents worth: the female human body is badly "designed" for
childbearing. No other mammal requires aid in childbirth the way
humans do, and humans *still* have the best chance of dying in
childbirth of any mammal.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 10:51:43 PM |
|
|
On May 24, 6:09 am, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
How about why two eyes in front and none at the back?
How about why 5 fingers and not 3 or 8, for practical or efficiency?
How about why brain can process evil thoughts?
How about why allow for a cut to drain blood from our body and not a
tough skin un-penetratable by knife?
How about why virus is created to sick humen?
How about a million of other non-sense created?
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for 'Intelligent' Design |
25 May 2007 11:26:21 PM |
|
|
On 26 May, 04:51, wrote:
On May 24, 6:09 am, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
This particular issue has been bugging me for quite a long time now,
and I am sure others would agree that the human body is beset with
arrangements that if the alleged designer actually existed people
would be demanding compensation for all the suffering they have
experienced due to the 'intelligent' design of the body they inhabit.
Let's take a look a some of the wonderful examples of 'intelligent'
design in the human body.
May I apologise in advance to any ladies that may be reading this as
it may seem that I am focussing mainly on the shortcomings of the male
body, but there is a reason for this.
And the reason is; "When god created man, she was only joking".
1) Waste disposal and reproductive structures utilising the same
outlet in the male.
2) Waste disposal, blood pressure, salt and water regulation, and red
corpuscle growth triggering hormone all tied up in the one pair of
organs.
3) The same organs being prone to failure without any means of backup
or repair.
4) The prostate gland, so vital to reproduction, wrapped around the
outlet of the bladder, so that when it enlarges disposal of urine is
impaired and the risk of infection increased.
5) The testicles, needing a lower temperature than the rest of the
body to produce sperm, so they dangle outside, and being so fragile
thus exposed to a high risk of damage.
Anyone care to disagree with me on these points?
How about why two eyes in front and none at the back?
How about why 5 fingers and not 3 or 8, for practical or efficiency?
How about why brain can process evil thoughts?
How about why allow for a cut to drain blood from our body and not a
tough skin un-penetratable by knife?
How about why virus is created to sick humen?
How about a million of other non-sense created?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My OP was about actual arrangements within the human body that cause
problems, which I actually pointed out.
However your questions dont appear to cover the topic. Perhaps you
could explain why you think a lack of eyes in the back of the head is
a defect, or why you seem to be unaware that more or fewer fingers
dont improve the 'practical or efficiency' of the human hand.
Perhaps you can explain how the brain could be structured to prevent
'evil thoughts', or how a human would be able to grow if the skin lost
its flexibilty.
Perhaps you could also explain why you think the existence of disease
causing organisms is a defect in the human body.
And finally perhaps you could explain what relevance your question
have to the topic of this thread.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
