Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2013, 11:15 AM
Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
I was thinking about the idea of "intelligent design" and how our bodies are [evidence of them NOT having intelligence in some aspect]. Some have pointed out the apendex, the blindspot in the eye [and the flipped image], . . . . but the other day, I was questioning "human body hair". What is the purpose FOR body hair [arms, legs, and on guys, chest, back, etc]? Does if fill a need? What about those who have very little body hair? Are they being neglacted in some area?

Or, is human body hair a part of our primate ancestory that no longer serves a specific purpose? It doesn't keep us warm! It doesn't keep the sun from burning the skin!

Opinions?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 01:14 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
There's some very interesting topics on human hair and the purpose. If memory serves me correctly, essentially we started losing our hair as time progressed because we tended to start sweating more to cool our bodies so they didn't overheat. This is why we still have hair, but hardly any of it on most of our bodies except in certain uhhh areas.

More interestingly, if you go do some research on lice, yes, lice... you will find that with time even lice evolved WITH us. There are specific species of lice that evolved with time to live specifically in your pubic hair (we call those crabs), and they evolved to live there because there was no way for them to generally transition over the body with time. So that specific species adapted to that ... ahem... environment.

You might really enjoy this particular video with Neil deGrasse Tyson from NOVA about lice and human hair and evolution.
http://video.pbs.org/video/1790635347/

Unfortunately, the polar opposite way of arguing intelligent design as, "Well if it's so intelligent then why do humans have x?" doesn't necessarily debunk said argument. Perhaps said deity was a shitty engineer? I know plenty of lazy engineers. However, I digress... It makes more sense to attack the argument from the point of evolution than it does the "well shitty design blah blah" because evolution, dna and history shows a LOT of evidence that puts ID to shame.

Official ordained minister of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Please pm me with prayer requests to his noodly goodness. Remember, he boiled for your sins and loves you. Carbo Diem! RAmen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Logisch's post
28-06-2013, 01:36 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
What Logisch said.

On a similar note the Giraffe should be the anti-intelligent design mascot:





If God engineered that, he was totally drunk!

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ridethespiral's post
28-06-2013, 02:59 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
Thanks. That is most reasonable. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 03:09 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
I loved that dissection - a giraffe - astounding! Clap


Disturbingly, I kept wondering what it tastes like. Shy

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
28-06-2013, 05:15 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
(28-06-2013 03:09 PM)kim Wrote:  I loved that dissection - a giraffe - astounding! Clap


Disturbingly, I kept wondering what it tastes like. Shy

I bet it tastes like chicken.
Everything tastes like chicken.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 05:19 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
(28-06-2013 05:15 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(28-06-2013 03:09 PM)kim Wrote:  I loved that dissection - a giraffe - astounding! Clap


Disturbingly, I kept wondering what it tastes like. Shy

I bet it tastes like chicken.
Everything tastes like chicken.

I imagine it would taste like horse but gamier.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 05:20 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
(28-06-2013 05:19 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(28-06-2013 05:15 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  I bet it tastes like chicken.
Everything tastes like chicken.

I imagine it would taste like horse but gamier.

Yabut, horse must taste like chicken too.
Everything tastes like chicken, dude.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 05:28 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
(28-06-2013 05:20 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(28-06-2013 05:19 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I imagine it would taste like horse but gamier.

Yabut, horse must taste like chicken too.
Everything tastes like chicken, dude.

Horse tastes nothing like chicken and good chicken doesn't taste of nothing. Get a free range natural feed chicken and see the difference in taste.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 05:34 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
Intelligent Design is patently ridiculous. As I learned of it originally from Dembski, a supposed mathematician and philosopher, I was first intrigued.

Then I was fucking pissed off.

I'm still fucking pissed off.

It's a simple proposition for shallow thinkers to confirm their bias. I consider NdT has one of the best arguments against it, unfortunately one has to think about stuff and accept the possibility of being wrong, two animals on the severely endangered list in the conceptual zoo of the theist's mind.

To directly address the OP, nah. "Vestigial" has too many syllables. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: