Challenges to Creationism

[Kirran]

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

Yes. It could be better designed.

Also, see the many wonderful points made by Ouroboros below.

 

[Ouroboros]

Yes. It could be better designed.

Another design could be that we could produce the pro-biotic culture, i.e. create our own bacteria. There's no need that bacteria produces bacteria and that we have to ingest it (strange thing is that we actually are dependent on receiving pro-biotic culture from our mom when we're naturally born. Yes, when we come out through... there... urk... just the thought... Research show that c-section kids have less resistance to disease because of this.)

 

[Kirran]

Another design could be that we could produce the pro-biotic culture, i.e. create our own bacteria. There's no need that bacteria produces bacteria and that we have to ingest it (strange thing is that we actually are dependent on receiving pro-biotic culture from our mom when we're naturally born. Yes, when we come out through... there... urk... just the thought... Research show that c-section kids have less resistance to disease because of this.)

I was born by C section. But that does make sense.

My disease resistance is absolutely wonderful, because I lived more or less without hygiene as a child. I ate sheep dung etc.

Why did God have us not be able to see UV and infra red?

Also, why did God have the tube we take in food by cross over the tube we breathe through?

Why did God make us need oxygen at all? Don't see why you'd engineer that.

 

[FearGod]

Yes. It could be better designed.

Also, see the many wonderful points made by Ouroboros below.

Would you believe in a designer then if there were no appendix ?

 

[SkepticThinker]

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.

I'm sorry, I don't understand your response or its relation to my post.

 

[SkepticThinker]

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?

Exactly. My mother almost died when I was a child when her appendix burst and spewed poison throughout her body. She's lived quite well for the past 20 years without it.

 

[Ouroboros]

Exactly. My mother almost died when I was a child when her appendix burst and spewed poison throughout her body. She's lived quite well for the past 20 years without it.

My wife was in for the same thing last year. She was in and out of the hospital for 2 months. Severe diverticulitis as well. She's doing all great now. No need for the appendix. One of my sons have only one kidney. People can live without several of the organs. If it's all perfectly designed, why do we need these extra things to carry around?

 

[SkepticThinker]

My wife was in for the same thing last year. She was in and out of the hospital for 2 months. Severe diverticulitis as well. She's doing all great now. No need for the appendix. One of my sons have only one kidney. People can live without several of the organs. If it's all perfectly designed, why do we need these extra things to carry around?

It was the same with my mother. In and out of the hospital, nobody was sure what was wrong. Then I found her one night, unconscious on the bathroom floor after having passed out and hitting her head on the toilet because her appendix had burst. She's lucky to be alive. Some great design there - your organs turn on you and try to kill you.

Was your son born with one kidney?

 

[LuisDantas]

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.

They will have some condition of passing along their genes. But the limping people will be far less succesfull in so doing, which is what natural selection is. The effect is intensified as generations follow.

 

[Ouroboros]

It was the same with my mother. In and out of the hospital, nobody was sure what was wrong. Then I found her one night, unconscious on the bathroom floor after having passed out and hitting her head on the toilet because her appendix had burst. She's lucky to be alive. Some great design there - your organs turn on you and try to kill you.

Dang. Crazy things that happen to people.

Was your son born with one kidney?

No. My kids and wife were in a huge car accident 20 years ago. He got severely hurt and had many surgeries afterwards.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

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

Yes, I think it's awful. Grubbing the earth for enough kilocalories of organic matter to burn through our systems is perhaps one of the worst designs of all.

I would have used photosynthetic skin that can allow us to directly absorb several hundred kilocalories of sunlight each day. In tandem, change the atmosphere's contents to diffuse sunlight evenly across the planet.

Or perhaps an organ that were born with that works as a small reactor to replenish cellular energy throughout the body.

Or just get rid of the body all together, and make our recognizable forms as mere products of a projection of mental energy, fueled by a supernatural conduit from our souls.

But that's just me, wishing I was the creator.

 

[Kirran]

Would you believe in a designer then if there were no appendix ?

No, because there are so so many other imperfections in the design of lifeforms.

 

[FearGod]

No, because there are so so many other imperfections in the design of lifeforms.

Do you hate that you're living by now and wish to die because of that many bad designs ?

 

[Kirran]

Do you hate that you're living by now and wish to die because of that many bad designs ?

No. I don't. I am very happy to be alive.

 

[shawn001]

Do you hate that you're living by now and wish to die because of that many bad designs ?

Do you fear God, FearGod?

 

[FearGod]

Do you fear God, FearGod?

Do you fear losing someone you love ? do you fear the future ?

 

[Altfish]

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.

Many things in nature surprise and fascinate me but when it comes to explaining the reasons I have found no reason to invoke a 'god' to justify them; there are always better reasons that science usually provides.
Your analogy with a TV set is flawed, because an engineer/designer would eventually spot the long wire and replace it with a shorter wire, if for no other reason than to save money. I'm still awaiting the celestial designer to spot the fault in the giraffe and shorten the recurrent laryngeal nerve.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Thankyou for replying Guy!

Thanks for the detailed responses, I'm only kidding they are of course all tough questions!
I don't speak for all creationists of course, but this would be how I would answer

I honestly find this a flimsy argument. Suffering, fear etc. can easily be had without a certain proportion of the population suffering from this diseases at random. We have war, we have love and loss, we have famine. Why are genetic diseases and these other disorders necessary?

I've experienced very similar tragedy throughout family and friends, as have most of us, and i'm sure more is in store- including for ourselves. Nobody gets out of here alive and it usually is not pleasant.
Still, very few of us would trade with a Jellyfish- a life of perfect ease and comfort- no grieving loved ones- because we cherish and love life to the extent we are aware of it's fragile, fleeting nature.
removing all 'unnecessary suffering of the innocent' sounds wonderful, but now everybody who suffers- by logical extension is not innocent- they deserve it? What happens to empathy, caring, helping, cherishing, that's what separates us from jellyfish- maybe removing suffering is our goal to strive for, not something to be granted, that's the only way is can have real meaning yes?
but in the larger perspective you cannot have good without bad anymore than left without right. They literally define each other, remove one and you remove the other do you not?
having said that, suffering, tragedy is the greatest test of faith for most of humanity, I understand that.

Fair enough, I hadn't seen it from this angle.

But why would God need to be just modifying designs, if he can design from scratch to perfection just as easily, rather than adapting an existing design to a new niche it doesn't quite fit?

As many atheists bring up, modification can be the most efficient, elegant way to design anything- somebody cited an improved antenna being designed by a computer using a process of random modification, natural selection etc.- In all cases, cars, life, I would argue that the process requires predetermined selection criteria, an intended result, a purpose, & purpose can only exist in consciousness.

Well the universal genetic code is a pretty good indicator of common ancestry. And actually, I can tell you that DNA is not that great at storing information and passing it on faithfully, hence mutations (why would God allow mutations, when it's just a deterioration of a perfect design?), but also isn't really well-suited to the environments in which certain organisms, like Thermus aquaticus, live. It would have been better to use something better suited to those environments than just try and shove a round peg in a square hole.

can life exist without mutation, adaptation? in that case we would all be identical yes?
as below I believe the universe was created primarily for our benefit, because we alone can know, appreciate the universe, we are the only means we know of by which the universe is even aware of itself- not Thermus aquaticus

So why did God create dinosaurs, for example, only to destroy them? Or, for that matter, woolly mammoths? Neanderthals?

well I could say I don't know, earthquakes, volcanoes, meteors were once arguments for 'bad design' until we learned of their crucial integral role in life on Earth. Certainly there will always be similar evidence of 'bad design' who's purpose we don't yet know- but wouldn't that be an argument from the gaps?
But in my opinion- the age of dinosaurs delayed mammals, while vast reserves of energy- crucial to human civilization, technology, exploration of the universe was accumulated.. until they were surgically removed by a perfectly aimed, weighted meteor - yet another amazing coincidence? perhaps, perhaps not

Why aren't lifeforms perfectly adapted to their environments? If all life had been created through intelligent design by a perfect being, you would expect that each species would be perfectly suited to the environment in which it found itself, and couldn't be replaced by a foreign species. As an example, the introduced grey squirrel has largely displaced the native red squirrel in the British Isles. Why would God have created a sub-optimal species as regards being suited to its particular environment?

That's a good question too, and again I don't pretend to know all the answers, but I'd think a dynamic changing world is part of the plan, nothing stays the same, and this is what makes it Earth -
But perhaps this state of unchanging eternal perfection, pure joy, love etc that we want from God exists by another name- not Earth, but heaven, and such a state of perfection can only exist relative to all the imperfection, here on Earth?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Sure. I know that it's not the same. Just saying that car technology has evolved since the Model-T, and there are paths that can be traced from different cars, models, technologies, up to our modern cars, so the car evolution is closer (not identical to, or exactly the same as) to evolution than creationism. Key word: closer to. What I'm saying is that the evolution of car technology shows a progression of simple to complex, just like evolution of biological life forms. Creationism is the belief in a design in situ, also called orchard hypothesis, which would be equal to a car industry where all the modern cars we have today and any car we have in the future were designed and built in 1908. No changes. So the example of the car industry does resemble evolution rather than specific creation.

Right, the point being that evolutionary trees are not at all inconsistent with intelligent design. They merely represent a diversity of niches- being filled in a specific order.

Likewise Genesis is very clear about life appearing in a specific order according to various forms and niches

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Evolution doesn't predict nor does it teach that evolution is a smooth gradual rate. The fossil record informs evolutionary theory, not the other way around.

The pace of evolution

it certainly used to predict exactly that- , but if the evidence doesn't fit the prediction, the prediction can be changed- then it's not a falsifiable scientific theory.