Get in my lock box!!!
Posted on 04/07/2014 1:11:34 PM PDT by fishtank
Vas deferens—refuting ‘bad design’ arguments E. van Niekerk
The vas deferens is an important part of the male reproductive system. However, some anti-creationists have recently criticized its route for being too indirect, thus something which no engineer would design. However, anatomists have already given good reasons for this structure, including the increased flexibility of the testes to move toward and way from the body to regulate temperature. Critics have also overlooked engineering considerations, providing enough length to build up power and to mix the essential ingredients of semen, and to avoid ‘ovalling’ (kinking in a soft pipe when bending).
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Dude. TMI.
********
There. You put it in a nutshell.
You are not taking into account meta design requirements. Specifically, easy female access to an instantly debilitating vulnerability in a significantly physically stronger partner.
I read a discussion once about a woman choosing a 22 for self-defense because of it's size, lack of recoil, etc. In response to critics deriding her for not having a "real" gun, she said she regularly silenced them by simply pointing out that in a survival situation, she intended to shoot for the balls.
Don’t be so testy.
It takes balls to write an article like this!
Name one person who wants to be shot with a .22.
The only self-defense downside of the .22 is it takes too long for the target to bleed out.
Bad design. A man with 10 million sperm is infertile. Why design a system that has 10 million sperm and can’t get one to the egg!
And if I had ever experienced it to not work properly, I might see his point.
Why? To encourage hard work and commitment.
In my case, stuff gotta move real far before coming out.
Trust me.
Because women won’t get close to you?
Well you don't use the same strategy for a 22 as for a larger caliber. And that was my point - women don't use the same fighting strategy as men, and that's why, IMHO, things hang outside of a guy. God didn't make a mistake - He leveled the playing field.
Actually, the longer I know women, the more I think He made men the underdogs.
No such thing as an anti-creationist. 99% of the people you are talking about ignore your issue completely.
Get in my lock box!!!
That’s how I heard it too — but, I only remembered the punch line, so I looked it up. I posted the first version I found on-line.
Why mix waste with reproduction? Why not two separate delivery systems?
Just my casual impression that in the past every story about graphene was a story about IBM research. Then out of the blue ( to me ) Samsung starts prototype production of a product.
Yep. Creation “science” never tires of destroying straw men.
“So Jones himself displays ignorance of Darwinian evolution’s non-goal-directedness/purposelessness.”
I have tried correcting this fundamental misstatement of the theory of evolution so often it’s become tiresome. There is nothing random about mutations passed on to descendents. The changes are either neutral and thus carried on by chance or they benefit the creatures ability to survive. The second instance is the central mechanism of evolution. Best is normative and has nothing to do it. Survival of the “best” got us eugenics and all sorts of nightmares but is fundamentally unscientific.
Why do you give credence to peri-scientific disputes about theology?
This is a theological debate wherein limited understandings of science are used as a vehicle between those who oppose belief in a creator and those who believe in a creator.
Biologically speaking, there is a vas deferens between a man and a woman.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.