If Intelligent Design is exactly that, what's with all the design flaws?

revelator

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1136069409330
Here's an article from The Toronto Star that I quite enjoyed. The gist of it being that if these bodies are the best that God could do... then it doesn't say much for the all knowing and all powerful nature of God .

wasteofo2

I'm particularly annoyed at the design of testicles. What, may I ask, would've been so difficult about designing sperm so that they could withstand 98.6 degress, and allowing for men to have testicles not be just hanging there, waiting to cause inordinate amounts of pain to their owners?

Also, as a 6'3" guy, I would've appreciated the foresight to have my body designed so that my ligaments and tendons would NOT have grown slower than my bones when I was a young teen.

arildno

In contrast to Stephen Jay Gould, I hold that male nipples is, in fact, a very good design detail.

Pengwuino

Same old childish rhetoric if I do say so myself.

But that was the funniest thing I've heard all ye...the last 365 days.

I also agree, whats this crap with testicles? I say this is PROOF God exists... except hes a sadist... I don't see why evolution would result in every nerve being bundled up into one small easily kickable area that delivers such amazing pain that it turns even the greatest of men into crying babies. It's a joke, God did it so he can occasionally laugh his *** off at us. We're all pawns in his little joke of a universe. Somewhere out there, there is another universe, the REAL universe, where such horrible biological blind spots don't exist and where people don't date their own mothers and the Darwin Awards are not necessary.

arildno

There isn't supposed to be any crap about testicles.
On their own, they're quite handy.

fargoth

a perfect world would be a dull place.
this world is as funny as hell
and it really does seem that someone manipulated it so itd be that funny
i think id open a thread about the bloopers in history (and present day)

Entropy

Well actually, according to Bible, man was perfect in the garden of eden. He didn't age, have disease, and was in perfect health. But after Adam and Eve sinned they lost their perfect and ergo passed down imperfection to their offspring. As a result modern man gets sick and eventually dies. So pointing out "mistakes" in human design isn't going to smash ID seeing how "mistakes" can be called a result of man's inherited inperfection from original sin.

Pengwuino

Stop trying to mix religion and science!!!!! *beats entropy over the head with a fish*

Evo

The "design" didn't change, humans have always been flawed. When God realized that Adam & Eve would eventually notice that they were starting to age, God made up a reason to explain it by saying they sinned and "kicking" them out before they caught on.

Burnsys

But that is what your religion says.... my religion With The Flying spaghetti monster as God created the humans just as they are today with his Noodly Appendage.

selfAdjoint

This assumes that ID has the theological arguments from the bible story available to it. But it doesn't; ID is an attempt to (pretend to) attack evolution on scientific grounds, by asserting that some things animals have are too unique to have evolved to they must have been designed. And the IDers are very careful not to say in public that the designer was god.

So if the ID people were caught using St. Paul's theory of original sin as you did, that would be embarrassing to them.

revelator

Damn.. that almighty is a sneaky one

Mk

I would have forgave man by now. Jesus I'm better than God.

Wait wait wait... all this because one guy ate a ****in APPLE!!!

revelator

Well, it wasn't just any old apple. It was the apple from the tree, that they were explicitly forbidden to eat from.

Perhaps God shouldn't have given humans a curious and rebellious nature, if it was so important that Adam and Eve don't eat the damn apple. He really should've been able to foresee that...

Amp1

Just maybe the design was a pattern that would evolve over time from uni-cellular to multi-cellular through a selection that is natural until the creature emerged from the water and stood erect and became self-aware as it developed the ability to reason.

Entropy

You guys don't understand my point. My point was that creationists aren't going to be detered by this artical because they have theology that explains human inperfection.

Entropy

This artical went there before I did.