Skip to comments.Is the male reproductive system poorly designed?
Posted on 02/08/2019 8:06:16 AM PST by fishtank
Is the male reproductive system poorly designed?
by Jerry Bergman
One of the latest proofs of human evolution is the poor design claim, namely that an intelligent Creator would not design some human body part in a certain way. An example is the human male reproductive system, which Rowe listed as number four in his list of the top 10 design flaws in the human body.1 The human male reproductive system poor design claim focuses on the view that if testicles were designed, then why didnt God protect them better. Couldnt the Designer have put them inside the body, or encased them in bone like the brain which is surrounded by a hard skull?2
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Some questions are only answered by extensive experimentation.
I’ll go ask my offspring.
It would not hurt when kicked.
this thread sets up perfectly for an old joke that will kill the thread...
The design of women proves that God is a civil engineer. Who else would route a sewage disposal line through a recreational area?
Gene McDaniels has something to sing about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g-iw6EU0Tw
With a sample pool of over 7.5 Billion humans she concludes this?
Mine is working just fine..into my late 80's! No complaints heard.
You mean, like eyes, that are completely encased in... no not eyes.
Oh, you mean ears that don't have any openin... no not ears.
Maybe we should have been in an exo-skeleton???
Its always served me well, and Ive never heard any complaints either. In fact, theres been nothing but praise.
In conclusion, clear evidence exists that year-round reproductive cycles, plus the requirement that human sperm must be kept close to a constant temperature of 4˚C below that of the core body temperature, effectively explains the existing design of testicles. Men who have uncorrected non-descended testicles are usually infertile and prone to many other health problems, including cancer. In short, the existing complex design is required for many reasons, including fertility and health reasons. It is, therefore, clear that Hafers poor design claim, along with those of other evolutionists, is grossly irresponsible.
There are some shortcomings.
These evolutionary biologists don’t know they are arguing theology, not science.
Ever see the movie "Enemy Mine"?
Yes, their arguments are dumb, but that’s not their biggest problem. The problem is they’re arguing theology not biology.
This is the type of article which causes men to take photos of their... well you know and send it... .. you know.
I think our boys were put there to enable victims of attacks to exercise their fight or flight response. From the time they are little girls, they know exactly where to kick. It’s in their DNA.
My dog makes his own vitamin C, but I can’t make mine.
The Creator is an underachiever.
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.