Challenges to Creationism

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

So it isn't surprising to you that all connections are correct as to be enough for you to think of a designer but only a longer wiring is an evidence for you that it was done by chance and evolution , it is like finding a long wire in a working TV while a short one can do the same job then you conclude that the TV wasn't designed because of the long wire.

No. That is idiotic. The TV has a brand name on it. It has a model number and serial number. This can be traced through compelling evidence as to when it was created, where, and even which electrical engineers designed it.

Many things created by fallible man contain design flaws; including, quite possibly, TVs with excess and wasteful wiring. As a TV is constructed and designed by fallible men, we can expect no more than less than perfect outcomes.

However, when engineers design grossly inadequate designs, or repeated problematic designs, they are eventually labeled as "incompetent". But, why should we find design flaws in organisms that were created by an omniscient perfect being? Wisdom teeth are a design flaw; large percentage of those of us with poor eyesight are a design flaw; genetic diseases brought forth by our reproductive means is a design flaw; high mortality rates in childbirth reflect several more design flaws; excess and useless organs is wasteful designs (at least) or at most design flaw; thus, the alleged designer must be fallible or incompetent. And this scratches the surface on only one of this alleged engineer's millions of designs; which, ironicaly, is supposed to be his favorite one!

But, the alleged designer is supposed to be perfect and omniscient.

Consistently imperfect/problematic designs put forth by a perfect designer is an irreconcilable conundrum. One or the other must go: Either the notion of his designer deity, or the notin of this designer deity being perfect and omniscient.

 

[FearGod]

It's about poor design, I think.
A better comparison would be if the cable guy came to your house to hook up your cable and instead of just running the cable straight through the wall to the TV, he wound it around your house 5 times, up and down the drain pipe, up through the basement, around your kitchen table, and then into the TV.

And why not one leg a little bit longer than the other ? if we aren't working well then that will be due to a bad design.

 

[FearGod]

No. That is idiotic. The TV has a brand name on it. It has a model number and serial number. This can be traced through compelling evidence as to when it was created, where, and even which electrical engineers designed it.

Many things created by fallible man contain design flaws; including, quite possibly, TVs with excess and wasteful wiring. As a TV is constructed and designed by fallible men, we can expect no more than less than perfect outcomes.

However, when engineers design grossly inadequate designs, or repeated problematic designs, they are eventually labeled as "incompetent". But, why should we find design flaws in organisms that were created by an omniscient perfect being? Wisdom teeth are a design flaw; large percentage of those of us with poor eyesight are a design flaw; genetic diseases brought forth by our reproductive means is a design flaw; high mortality rates in childbirth reflect several more design flaws; excess and useless organs is wasteful designs (at least) or at most design flaw; thus, the alleged designer must be fallible or incompetent. And this scratches the surface on only one of this alleged engineer's millions of designs; which, ironicaly, is supposed to be his favorite one!

But, the alleged designer is supposed to be perfect and omniscient.

Consistently imperfect/problematic designs put forth by a perfect designer is an irreconcilable conundrum. One or the other must go: Either the notion of his designer deity, or the notin of this designer deity being perfect and omniscient.

So you don't think that the complexity of the eye was made by a designer because some has poor eyesight ?
You don't think that the teeth arrangement up and down was due to a designer just because of the wisdom teeth ?

Which organs are useless which indicates that no designer was involved, the stomach, the pancreas, the gallbladder, the duodenum, the liver, the colon, the rectum, the anus, the lungs, the heart, the kidneys, the spleen, the urinary bladder, the arteries, the muscles, the bones, the brain, the eyes, the ears...etc

 

[Kirran]

So you don't think that the complexity of the eye was made by a designer because some has poor eyesight ?
You don't think that the teeth arrangement up and down was due to a designer because of the wisdom teeth ?

Which organs are useless which indicates that no designer was needed, the stomach, the pancreas, the gallbladder, the duodenum, the liver, the colon, the rectum, the anus, the lungs, the heart, the kidneys, the spleen, the urinary bladder, the arteries, the muscles, the bones, the brain, the eyes, the ears...etc

The appendix.

 

[FearGod]

The appendix.

Because we weren't knowing doesn't mean it has no function, recent studies found the appendix to be a safe reservoir for the good bacteria to hide in.

Appendix is a small dead-end tube connected to a section of your large intestine. Mainstream medicine is convinced that the appendix has no apparent function and is virtually useless. However, the latest research has found that appendix is not just a useless piece of your body. The appendix has remained in people for thousands years for a reason. The reason – to harbor good bacteria essential for health. Appendix acts as an incubator for beneficial bacteria that aid the body in digestion.


When you contract an infection or a disease, such as diphtheria, these good bacteria could hide in there, eager to repopulate your gut when the danger is over.

Researchers from Duke University Medical School concluded that the appendix provides a reservoir of beneficial microbes so that the body can replenish its supply in case a disease causes the bacteria in the lower gut to be purged.
In a recent study performed by researchers from the University of Arizona College of Medicine and Arizona State University, published in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology, found that the appendix does have a purpose. It is a “safe-house for symbiotic gut microbes. ” “This function is potentially a selective force for the evolution and maintenance of the appendix, and provides an impetus for reassessment of the evolution of the appendix,” the scientists stated.
However, appendicitis should be taken very serious. It can be life threatening. About 300 to 400 Americans die, and about 321,000 are hospitalized due to appendicitis each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Appendix May Perform Useful Function, Researchers Say – Appendix May Perform Useful Function, Researchers Say

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

So you don't think that the complexity of the eye was made by a designer because some has poor eyesight ?
You don't think that the teeth arrangement up and down was due to a designer just because of the wisdom teeth ?

Which organs are useless which indicates that no designer was involved, the stomach, the pancreas, the gallbladder, the duodenum, the liver, the colon, the rectum, the anus, the lungs, the heart, the kidneys, the spleen, the urinary bladder, the arteries, the muscles, the bones, the brain, the eyes, the ears...etc

A quick google search will answer your question about useless organs and body parts.

Moreover, you missed part of my point: With all the flaws of biological organs, either there is no designer; or the designer is competent (thus not omniscient).

 

[LuisDantas]

A quick google search will answer your question about useless organs and body parts.

Moreover, you missed part of my point: With all the flaws of biological organs, either there is no designer; or the designer is competent (thus not omniscient).

I have come to suspect he will simply not realize that this is a legitimate criticism (although I think you meant to write "incompetent").

 

[LuisDantas]

And why not one leg a little bit longer than the other ? if we aren't working well then that will be due to a bad design.

It does happen, as a matter of fact. But since it was such a significant disadvantage for so much of our history, the genetic combinations that encourage that specific assymetry tend to be phased out quite reliably. People with that disadvantage often died early or failed to have offspring for reasons directly related to that deficiency.

 

[FearGod]

It does happen, as a matter of fact. But since it was such a significant disadvantage for so much of our history, the genetic combinations that encourage that specific assymetry tend to be phased out quite reliably. People with that disadvantage often died early or failed to have offspring for reasons directly related to that deficiency.

The lames can't reproduce !
does it affect erection ?

 

[LuisDantas]

The lames can't reproduce !
does it affect erection ?

First of all, I would appreciate if you made more of an effort to deserve my attention. I am not dumb and I am being more considerate with you than you betray realizing.

Now for your question's answer.

Lames do reproduce, certainly, but not nearly as succesfully as people who have no locomotion difficulty.

There are at least two fairly obvious reasons why.

First, because they are indeed lame - which is to say, they have a harder time surviving when faced with physical adversity. They die before reproducing that much more often than random people would, and therefore their genetical makeups are simply not as succesfull in being passed to later generations.

Second, because for humans to reproduce they have to mate. And lame people are quite consistently not perceived as very attractive. Which means that even when they survive to old age they will not have as much opportunity to mate as they would if they were not lame. They will on average have noticeably less offspring, and therefore their tendency will become harder to find.

That, my friend, is natural selection. Not a difficult concept to grasp really.

 

[FearGod]

First of all, I would appreciate if you made more of an effort to deserve my attention. I am not dumb and I am being more considerate with you than you betray realizing.

Now for your question's answer.

Lames do reproduce, certainly, but not nearly as succesfully as people who have no locomotion difficulty.

There are at least two fairly obvious reasons why.

First, because they are indeed lame - which is to say, they have a harder time surviving when faced with physical adversity. They die before reproducing that much more often than random people would, and therefore their genetical makeups are simply not as succesfull in being passed to later generations.

Second, because for humans to reproduce they have to mate. And lame people are quite consistently not perceived as very attractive. Which means that even when they survive to old age they will not have as much opportunity to mate as they would if they were not lame. They will on average have noticeably less offspring, and therefore their tendency will become harder to find.

That, my friend, is natural selection. Not a difficult concept to grasp really.

Can't we love a woman if she's pretty,kind and understanding but a little bit limping ?

 

[LuisDantas]

Can't we love a woman if she's pretty,kind and understanding but a little bit limping ?

Of course we can. But you are sidestepping the point. Do you agree or not that people with physical disadvantages tend to have less offspring, particularly when one considers a series of successive generations?

 

[FearGod]

Of course we can. But you are sidestepping the point. Do you agree or not that people with physical disadvantages tend to have less offspring, particularly when one considers a series of successive generations?

Both will be able to pass their genetics to the next generation, i don't think a little bit limping will affect sex relationship before millions of years ago.

 

[Kirran]

Because we weren't knowing doesn't mean it has no function, recent studies found the appendix to be a safe reservoir for the good bacteria to hide in.

Appendix is a small dead-end tube connected to a section of your large intestine. Mainstream medicine is convinced that the appendix has no apparent function and is virtually useless. However, the latest research has found that appendix is not just a useless piece of your body. The appendix has remained in people for thousands years for a reason. The reason – to harbor good bacteria essential for health. Appendix acts as an incubator for beneficial bacteria that aid the body in digestion.


When you contract an infection or a disease, such as diphtheria, these good bacteria could hide in there, eager to repopulate your gut when the danger is over.

Researchers from Duke University Medical School concluded that the appendix provides a reservoir of beneficial microbes so that the body can replenish its supply in case a disease causes the bacteria in the lower gut to be purged.
In a recent study performed by researchers from the University of Arizona College of Medicine and Arizona State University, published in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology, found that the appendix does have a purpose. It is a “safe-house for symbiotic gut microbes. ” “This function is potentially a selective force for the evolution and maintenance of the appendix, and provides an impetus for reassessment of the evolution of the appendix,” the scientists stated.
However, appendicitis should be taken very serious. It can be life threatening. About 300 to 400 Americans die, and about 321,000 are hospitalized due to appendicitis each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Appendix May Perform Useful Function, Researchers Say – Appendix May Perform Useful Function, Researchers Say

Thanks for the information. I had appendicitis myself, don't have an appendix anymore.

So, why did God make an organ which was so redundant (its purpose isn't necessary for a healthy life) and so prone to developing life-threatening problems?

 

[Ouroboros]

Thanks for the information. I had appendicitis myself, don't have an appendix anymore.

So, why did God make an organ which was so redundant (its purpose isn't necessary for a healthy life) and so prone to developing life-threatening problems?

And also... if you can live without it, then why even have it? And yet another thing, I still have my appendix, but I get stomach bugs now and then and it doesn't help me. Most of us have to replenish the micro/pro-biotic culture regardless. Also, sometimes the wrong culture will end up in the appendix and replenish the intestines with the wrong one! So it's a very poor design for this supposed purpose.

 

[Kirran]

And also... if you can live without it, then why even have it? And yet another thing, I still have my appendix, but I get stomach bugs now and then and it doesn't help me. Most of us have to replenish the micro/pro-biotic culture regardless. Also, sometimes the wrong culture will end up in the appendix and replenish the intestines with the wrong one! So it's a very poor design for this supposed purpose.

I imagine it can just as well serve as a reservoir for facultative pathogens as commensal flora.

For that matter, why do we have microflora? They're a disaster waiting to happen, when we could have had all their functions designed into us. Why would God make the whole thing so unstable? Why would God create a world where E. coli can become pathogenic? Or where Helicobacter pylori was symbiotic in some cases and pathogenic in others?

 

[FearGod]

Thanks for the information. I had appendicitis myself, don't have an appendix anymore.

So, why did God make an organ which was so redundant (its purpose isn't necessary for a healthy life) and so prone to developing life-threatening problems?

Bu recent studies shows that it's beneficial for digestion, but that doesn't mean a person will die without the appendix or will die without the gallbladder

 

[Kirran]

Bu recent studies shows that it's beneficial for digestion, but that doesn't mean a person will die without the appendix or will die without the gallbladder

OK. But why did God a) make it so prone to going wrong and b) make it such that it was mildly helpful at best, when this function could have been included within the remainder of the digestive system?

 

[FearGod]

OK. But why did God a) make it so prone to going wrong and b) make it such that it was mildly helpful at best, when this function could have been included within the remainder of the digestive system?

Do you think that the gastrointestinal system can be a better designed if the appendix wasn't a part of it ?

 

[Ouroboros]

I imagine it can just as well serve as a reservoir for facultative pathogens as commensal flora.

For that matter, why do we have microflora? They're a disaster waiting to happen, when we could have had all their functions designed into us. Why would God make the whole thing so unstable? Why would God create a world where E. coli can become pathogenic? Or where Helicobacter pylori was symbiotic in some cases and pathogenic in others?

Or why do we have to eat fruit with c-vitamins? Basically, all animal species except 5 produce their own c-vitamins. We have the genes, but it's damaged. And we share the exact same damage as the chimps. But the other 3 species have different damage on that gene. Why was it designed that way? (One of the ERVs for anyone wondering)

And also, why do we need this microflora as you say? We have a need of some microbiotics to help us retrieve vitamin K. The genes exist to do it... in the biota. The microbiotics contain about 10 times more genes than our own. But there's no reason why we couldn't have those genes ourselves so we could break down and work the nutritions that we need. It's a very unstable process.

It all points to a natural process of evolution. I'm sorry to say, but a sane and reasonable person can actually see this.