Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

External testicles another instance of bad design?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

From Nathan H. Lents, author of Human Errors: A Panorama of Our Glitches, from Pointless Bones to Broken Genes, at Undark:

Of course there’s an explanation (sperm like to develop at lower temperatures). But really: What intelligent designer could have come up with this?

It sounds as though Lents has never heard of the concept of “optimal”: best possible solution in given environment, as opposed to best theoretical solution as an abstraction.

The fact is that there is no good reason that sperm development has to work best at lower temperatures. It’s just a fluke, an example of poor design. If nature had an intelligent designer, he or she would have a lot to answer for. But since natural selection and other evolutionary forces are the true designers of our bodies, there is no one to question about this. We must interrogate ourselves: Why are we like this?

Oddly, in making such a dramatic claim (“there is no good reason that sperm development has to work best at lower temperatures”), Lents does not quote any expert on the subject of temperature and sperm development.

In addition to the obvious danger of designing such important organs without any protection or even padding, external testicles introduce additional problems for mammals. One in four men will develop a hernia in their groin, 10 times the rate of women, precisely because of a weakness in the abdominal wall left from the migration of the testicles out of the abdomen. Surgical repair is relatively straightforward, but surgery is a relatively new invention in the history of our species. While only a small percentage of these hernias become life-threatening, given how common they are, hernias have killed untold millions over the ages. More.

No wonder there is a mass panic about the worldwide shortage of births over the last century, resulting in mass depopulation, especially in the Third World…

Note: According to an online medical site re hernias, “In men, the incidence rises from 11 per 10,000 person-years, aged 16-24 years, to 200 per 10,000 person-years, aged 75 years or above.”  (Jenkins JT, O’Dwyer PJ; Inguinal hernias. BMJ. 2008 Feb 2336(7638):269-72.) In short, hernias tend to be a problem for older men, as do heart attacks, strokes, and prostate cancer.

Everything starts to break down as we age… If we are going to talk about design at all, we can’t compare mortality in this world to immortality somewhere that can sustain it.

See also: At Skeptic: Five Questions about Human Errors for Proponents of Intelligent Design

and

Jonathan Wells on Lents’s claim that the human eye is wired backwards

Comments
Marfin @45: Indeed. The whole bad design line of argumentation is an exercise in irrelevance as an argument against design. In addition to being naive about what is actually involved in building complex functional systems. In addition to being illogical in that it relies on a non-sequitur. In addition to having a terrible track record as we learn more about biology. It is an embarrassing argument and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issues. Its real value is as a litmus test: when we see someone putting the bad design argument forward we can take it to the bank that they have an agenda, or don't know what they are talking about, or haven't thought through the logic of the argument, or all of the above.Eric Anderson
May 22, 2018
May
05
May
22
22
2018
12:08 PM
12
12
08
PM
PDT
AK - without a given criteria every single body part of every single creature can be seen as sub optimal in some way or another, if you disagree with me on this name any body part of any creature and watch anyone here give you various reason that they can find it less than perfect. If you don`t know what the design criteria was you cannot claim it does not PERFECTLY meet that criteria.Marfin
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
11:10 PM
11
11
10
PM
PDT
AK @ 22:
Yes.
Well, you stepped over that tripwire.
I don’t know. ID is not prepared to propose any such constraints to the designer. Or rule them out. In short, ID is not prepared to propose anything that can be tested.
Were we not speaking of globally optimal design and global functional constraints? Reducing it to a subset, respecting less than divine designers, etc. can only excuse globally suboptimal designs on account of being optimal within the neighborhood of that lesser designer's repertoire. The suboptimality argument only gets weaker by taking non-divine designers into account. If it fails against the unlimited divine case, it fails everywhere.LocalMinimum
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
05:53 PM
5
05
53
PM
PDT
Allan:
Was that often a problem during your dating years?
You're the one who has to sit to pee.ET
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
04:37 PM
4
04
37
PM
PDT
To provide further evidence for information coming into the developing embryo ‘from the outside’, it is also important to note that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,,,
Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – 29 October 2012 Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,” http://www.quantumlah.org/highlight/121029_hidden_influences.php
And these quantum correlations which somehow arise from outside spacetime, are now found in molecular biology on a massive scale. In every DNA and Protein molecule,,,
Darwinian Materialism vs Quantum Biology - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHdD2Am1g5Y "What happens is this classical information (of DNA) is embedded, sandwiched, into the quantum information (of DNA). And most likely this classical information is never accessed because it is inside all the quantum information. You can only access the quantum information or the electron clouds and the protons. So mathematically you can describe that as a quantum/classical state." Elisabeth Rieper – Classical and Quantum Information in DNA – video (Longitudinal Quantum Information resides along the entire length of DNA discussed at the 19:30 minute mark; at 24:00 minute mark Dr Rieper remarks that practically the whole DNA molecule can be viewed as quantum information with classical information embedded within it) https://youtu.be/2nqHOnVTxJE?t=1176 Quantum coherent-like state observed in a biological protein for the first time - October 13, 2015 Excerpt: If you take certain atoms and make them almost as cold as they possibly can be, the atoms will fuse into a collective low-energy quantum state called a Bose-Einstein condensate. In 1968 physicist Herbert Fröhlich predicted that a similar process at a much higher temperature could concentrate all of the vibrational energy in a biological protein into its lowest-frequency vibrational mode. Now scientists in Sweden and Germany have the first experimental evidence of such so-called Fröhlich condensation (in proteins).,,, The real-world support for Fröhlich's theory took so long to obtain because of the technical challenges of the experiment, Katona said. https://phys.org/news/2015-10-quantum-coherent-like-state-biological-protein.html
Of final note, besides quantum information providing direct empirical falsification of neo-Darwinian claims that say information is emergent from a material basis, the implication of finding 'non-local', beyond space and time, and ‘conserved’, quantum information in molecular biology on such a massive scale, is fairly, and pleasantly, obvious. That pleasant implication, or course, being the fact that we now have direct physical evidence strongly indicating that we do indeed have an eternal soul that is capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies. As Stuart Hameroff notes in this following video, “the quantum information,, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed.,,, it's possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”
“Let’s say the heart stops beating. The blood stops flowing. The microtubules lose their quantum state. But the quantum information, which is in the microtubules, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed. It just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large. If a patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says, “I had a near death experience. I saw a white light. I saw a tunnel. I saw my dead relatives.,,” Now if they’re not revived and the patient dies, then it's possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.” - Stuart Hameroff - Quantum Entangled Consciousness - Life After Death - video (5:00 minute mark) https://youtu.be/jjpEc98o_Oo?t=300
Verses:
James 2:26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. Matthew 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Psalm 139:13-14 For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well.
bornagain77
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
03:56 PM
3
03
56
PM
PDT
Moreover, this 'positional information' which is not reducible to DNA sequences and which specifies the three-dimensional arrangement of the molecular components of the cell, is found to be enormous. Much greater than the sequential information, as great as that sequential information is, that is encoded on DNA. For example, the following article notes that there are 10^12 positionally different cell types
How many different cells are there in complex organisms? Excerpt: The nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans, the cellular ontogeny of which has been precisely mapped, has 1,179 and 1,090 distinct somatic cells (including those that undergo programmed cell death) in the male and female, respectively, each with a defined history and fate. Therefore, if we take the developmental trajectories and cell position into account, C. elegans has 10^3 different cell identities, even if many of these cells are functionally similar. By this reasoning, although the number of different cell types in mammals is often considered to lie in the order of hundreds, it is actually in the order of 10^12 if their positional identity and specific ontogeny are considered. Humans have an estimated 10^14 cells, mostly positioned in precise ways and with precise organization, shape and function, in skeletal architecture, musculature and organ type, many of which (such as the nose) show inherited idiosyncrasies. Even if the actual number of cells with distinct identities is discounted by a factor of 100 (on the basis that 99% of the cells are simply clonal expansions of a particular cell type in a particular location or under particular conditions (for example, fat, muscle or immune cells)), there are still 10^12 positionally different cell types. http://ai.stanford.edu/~serafim/CS374_2006/papers/Mattick_NRG2004.pdf
Moreover, the information content that is found to be in a one cell bacterium, when working from the thermodynamic perspective, is found to be 10 to the 12 bits,,,
Biophysics – Information theory. Relation between information and entropy: - Setlow-Pollard, Ed. Addison Wesley Excerpt: Linschitz gave the figure 9.3 x 10^12 cal/deg or 9.3 x 10^12 x 4.2 joules/deg for the entropy of a bacterial cell. Using the relation H = S/(k In 2), we find that the information content is 4 x 10^12 bits. Morowitz' deduction from the work of Bayne-Jones and Rhees gives the lower value of 5.6 x 10^11 bits, which is still in the neighborhood of 10^12 bits. Thus two quite different approaches give rather concordant figures. http://www.astroscu.unam.mx/~angel/tsb/molecular.htm
,,, Which is equivalent of 100 million pages of Encyclopedia Britannica. 'In comparison,,, the largest libraries in the world,, have about 10 million volumes or 10^12 bits.”
“a one-celled bacterium, e. coli, is estimated to contain the equivalent of 100 million pages of Encyclopedia Britannica. Expressed in information in science jargon, this would be the same as 10^12 bits of information. In comparison, the total writings from classical Greek Civilization is only 10^9 bits, and the largest libraries in the world – The British Museum, Oxford Bodleian Library, New York Public Library, Harvard Widenier Library, and the Moscow Lenin Library – have about 10 million volumes or 10^12 bits.” – R. C. Wysong 'The information content of a simple cell has been estimated as around 10^12 bits, comparable to about a hundred million pages of the Encyclopedia Britannica." Carl Sagan, "Life" in Encyclopedia Britannica: Macropaedia (1974 ed.), pp. 893-894
In the following video, it is noted that the information to build a human infant, atom by atom, would take up the equivalent of enough thumb drives to fill the Titanic, multiplied by 2,000.
In a TED Talk, (the Question You May Not Ask,,, Where did the information come from?) - November 29, 2017 Excerpt: Sabatini is charming.,,, he deploys some memorable images. He points out that the information to build a human infant, atom by atom, would take up the equivalent of enough thumb drives to fill the Titanic, multiplied by 2,000. Later he wheels out the entire genome, in printed form, of a human being,,,,: [F]or the first time in history, this is the genome of a specific human, printed page-by-page, letter-by-letter: 262,000 pages of information, 450 kilograms.,,, https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/in-a-ted-talk-heres-the-question-you-may-not-ask/
The following video states that "There are 10^28 atoms in the human body.,, The amount of data contained in the whole human,, is 3.02 x 10^32 gigabytes of information. Using a high bandwidth transfer, that data would take about 4.5 x 10^18 years to teleport 1 time. That is 350,000 times the age of the universe."
Will Teleportation Ever Be Possible? - video - 2013 https://youtu.be/yfePpMTbFYY?t=76 Quote from video: "There are 10^28 atoms in the human body.,, The amount of data contained in the whole human,, is 3.02 x 10^32 gigabytes of information. Using a high bandwidth transfer that data would take about 4.5 x 10^18 years to teleport 1 time. That is 350,000 times the age of the universe." If we forget about recognizing atoms and measuring their velocities and just scale that to a resolution of one-atomic length in each direction that's about 10^32 bits (a one followed by thirty two zeros). This is so much information that even with the best optical fibers conceivable it would take over one hundred million centuries to transmit all that information!,,, (A fun talk on teleportation - Professor Samuel Braunstein - http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~schmuel/tport.html
Moreover, we have fairly strong evidence indicating that this enormous amount of positional information, that is telling all the atoms of the developing embryo exactly where to be, is not contained within the material particles of the developing embryo itself, but that this enormous amount of positional information, that is telling all these atoms of the developing embryo exactly where to be, is somehow coming into the developing embryo from outside the material realm. For instance, at about the 41:00 minute mark of the following video, Dr. Wells, using a branch of mathematics called category theory, demonstrates that, during embryological development, information must somehow be added to the developing embryo, ‘from the outside’, by some ‘non-material’ method.
Design Beyond DNA: A Conversation with Dr. Jonathan Wells – video (41:00 minute mark) – January 2017 https://youtu.be/ASAaANVBoiE?t=2484
bornagain77
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
03:56 PM
3
03
56
PM
PDT
as to this quote from Sebestyen's article in post 35:
"A successful theory will have to explain the full diversity of mammalian testicle positions, not just the scrotum’s existence."
Darwin's theory can't even explain the existence of proteins much less the scrotum’s existence. Nor can Darwin's theory even explain the position of proteins much less the position of testicles. Although much ink has been spilled on the pages of UD elucidating the impossibility of Darwinian processes to account for the origin and subsequent transforming of proteins,,,
Douglas Axe - The Research (Part 2) 11-5-2016 by Paul Giem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRj8vUMp03o&index=11&list=PLHDSWJBW3DNUx3ngrgTIQyl-B2TaQBoq8 1. Axe, D. D. 2004. Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds. J Mol Biol 341: 1295-1315. Available at http://www.toriah.org/articles/axe-2004.pdf Douglas Axe - The Research (Part 3) 11-12-2016 by Paul Giem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1kmw9u3ljo&index=12&list=PLHDSWJBW3DNUx3ngrgTIQyl-B2TaQBoq8 1. Axe, D. D. 2010. The limits of complex adaptation: An analysis based on a simple model of structured bacterial populations. BIO-Complexity 2010(4): 1-10. Available at http://www.bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/viewFile/BIO-C.2010.4/BIO-C.2010.4 2. Gauger, A. K. and D. D. Axe. 2011. The evolutionary accessibility of new enzyme functions: a case study from the biotin pathway. BIO-Complexity 2011(1): 1-17. Available at http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/viewFile/BIO-C.2011.1/BIO-C.2011.1 3. Lynch, M. and A. Abegg. 2010. The rate of establishment of complex adaptations. Mol Biol Evol 27: 1404-1414. Available at http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/27/6/1404.long
Although much ink has been spilled on the pages of UD elucidating the impossibility of Darwinian processes to account for the origin and subsequent transforming of proteins, much less ink has been spilled on the impossibility of Darwinian processes to account for the position of proteins in an organism.
Darwinism vs Biological Form - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyNzNPgjM4w Excerpt: To further drive to point home that the basic form of any particular organism is not reducible to the material particulars of an organism, in the following article it is noted that, Richard Lewontin once described how you can excise the developing limb bud from an amphibian embryo, shake the cells loose from each other, allow them to reaggregate into a random lump, and then replace the lump in the embryo. A normal leg develops. Somehow the form of the limb as a whole is the ruling factor, redefining the parts according to the larger pattern.
What Do Organisms Mean? Stephen L. Talbott - Winter 2011 Excerpt: Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin once described how you can excise the developing limb bud from an amphibian embryo, shake the cells loose from each other, allow them to reaggregate into a random lump, and then replace the lump in the embryo. A normal leg develops. Somehow the form of the limb as a whole is the ruling factor, redefining the parts according to the larger pattern. Lewontin went on to remark: "Unlike a machine whose totality is created by the juxtaposition of bits and pieces with different functions and properties, the bits and pieces of a developing organism seem to come into existence as a consequence of their spatial position at critical moments in the embryo’s development. Such an object is less like a machine than it is like a language whose elements... take unique meaning from their context.[3]",,, http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/what-do-organisms-mean Intelligent Design and the Advancement of Science - Brian Miller - December 11, 2017 Excerpt: Similarly, mathematician René Thom argued that the 3D patterns of tissues in an organism’s development from egg to birth and their continuous transformation cannot be understood in terms of isolating the individual proteins generated by DNA and other molecules produced in cells. The problem is that the individual “parts” composing tissues and organs only take on the right form and function in the environment of those tissues and organs. More recent work by Denis Noble further has elucidated how every level of the biological hierarchy affects every other level, from DNA to tissues to the entire organism. Based partly on these insights, Thom concluded in his book Structural Stability and Morphogenesis that the process of development should be thought of as being controlled by an “algebraic structure outside space-time itself” (p. 119). Likewise, Robert Rosen argued that life can only be understood as a mathematical abstraction consisting of functional relationships, irreducible to mechanistic processes. He observed that life is fundamentally different from simple physics and chemistry. It embodies the Aristotelian category of final causation, which is closely related to the idea of purpose. The conclusions of these scholars challenge materialistic philosophy at its core. https://evolutionnews.org/2017/12/intelligent-design-and-the-advancement-of-science/
bornagain77
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
03:52 PM
3
03
52
PM
PDT
ET,
So what? A female can tell a male from female and a boy from a man just by looking at the testicles.
Was that often a problem during your dating years?Allan Keith
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
03:33 PM
3
03
33
PM
PDT
The basal condition for mammals is to have internal testes. The testes of the non-boreotherian mammals, such as the monotremes, armadillos, sloths, and elephants, remain within the abdomen. There are also some marsupials with external testes and Boreoeutherian mammals with internal testes, such as the rhinoceros. Cetaceans such as whales and dolphins also have internal testes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testicle
Evolution. It explains everything and its opposite.Mung
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
02:12 PM
2
02
12
PM
PDT
Allan doesn't know why it happened, or how it happened, but he has faith that it did happen. Amen.Mung
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
02:07 PM
2
02
07
PM
PDT
BA77 Interesting. There is a temperature issue too. Both and is of course feasible. AK Low sperm count is only one of many, many issues. KFkairosfocus
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
01:34 PM
1
01
34
PM
PDT
per Sebestyen at 25
The Scrotum Is Nuts Why are testicles kept in a vulnerable dangling sac? It’s not why you think. By Liam Drew - JULY 8 2013 Excerpt: In the mid-1990s, Michael Chance, a professor of animal behavior at the U.K.'s University of Birmingham, came across a newspaper story about the Oxford-Cambridge University boat race that piqued his interest in testicles. He learned that after the race, the rowers’ urine contained fluid from their prostates. The oarsmen's exertions, the cyclic abdominal straining, had deposited prostatic fluid in their urethras because there are no sphincters in the reproductive tract. Without such valves, squeezing of any of the sacs and tubes that make up this system is liable to empty it, or at least rearrange its contents. In 1996, in what has become known as the galloping hypothesis, Chance argued that externalization of the testes was necessary when mammals started to move in ways that sharply increased abdominal pressure. A survey of how mammals move reveals a good deal of variety. And when Chance listed animals with internal testicles, he didn't find many gallopers. The elephants, aardvarks, and their cousins on the undescended branch of the mammalian tree don't bound or jump around.,,, It's rather humbling to realize that this basic aspect of our bodies remains a mystery. The fact that such a ridiculous appendage evolved twice surely means we should be able to get a handle on it. A successful theory will have to explain the full diversity of mammalian testicle positions, not just the scrotum’s existence. I like Chance and Frey's galloping hypothesis, but could a scrotum really be the only way to deal with undulating abdominal pressure? http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/07/are_testicles_external_for_cooling_galloping_display_or_something_else.html
bornagain77
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
01:30 PM
1
01
30
PM
PDT
Low sperm count can’t be identified by looking at the testicles.
So what? A female can tell a male from female and a boy from a man just by looking at the testicles.ET
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
12:20 PM
12
12
20
PM
PDT
KairosFocus,
Display is probably right, as defects will be readily apparent. KF
Low sperm count can’t be identified by looking at the testicles. Short of a serious damage to the scrotum, a visual inspection won’t identify a problem with sperm production. Although, it does raise an image of our human female ancestors picking their mates by fondling their junk.Allan Keith
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
12:17 PM
12
12
17
PM
PDT
Display is probably right, as defects will be readily apparent. KFkairosfocus
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
11:59 AM
11
11
59
AM
PDT
God does not have testicles, so she wasn't really aware of the consequences of that design.Mung
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
11:16 AM
11
11
16
AM
PDT
Internal ovaries must be good design then.Mung
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
11:14 AM
11
11
14
AM
PDT
Allan:
In short, ID is not prepared to propose anything that can be tested.
What an ignorant thing to say seeing that ID, unlike evolutionism, has the methodology to test whether or not intelligent design exists. Allan's position doesn't even have a methodology.ET
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
10:47 AM
10
10
47
AM
PDT
Allan:
I said that evolution predicts the existance of suboptimal solutions.
Nonsense. Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes doesn't make such a prediction. And seeing that Allan cannot reference any scientific theory of evolution that states that prediction it is clearly BS.ET
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
10:45 AM
10
10
45
AM
PDT
Eric,
Evolution predicts no particular outcome.
I didn’t say that evolution predicts that all outcomes will be suboptimal. I said that evolution predicts the existance of suboptimal solutions. This is examined in hundreds of peer reviewed papers.Allan Keith
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
10:19 AM
10
10
19
AM
PDT
The argument of suboptimal design is just one of the many predictions of evolution.
No it isn't. Evolution predicts no particular outcome. There might be suboptimal design, there might be exquisite design. There might be large organisms, there might be small organisms. There might be creatures with wings and hearts and eyes, there might be creatures without. There is absolutely no principle of evolutionary theory that predicts any particular outcome. All evolution claims is: Stuff Happens. It is no more substantive than that.Eric Anderson
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
10:00 AM
10
10
00
AM
PDT
Here's an interesting read on the subject: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/07/are_testicles_external_for_cooling_galloping_display_or_something_else.html SebestyenSebestyen
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
09:54 AM
9
09
54
AM
PDT
Eric,
I’m so tired of these pathetic bad design arguments.
Bad design is not an argument. It is a prediction. Actually, it is sub-optimal “solutions” that are the prediction. Human eyes, abdominal wall, external testicles etc. are all suboptimal solutions, but they still function as well as they have to for survival and population growth. ID can certainly address this by hypothesizing about the constraints and limitations of the designer, but nobody is willing to do so. I can understand why people who believe that their Christian god is the designer would not do so. It would undermine the mythology that god is all powerful and all knowing. What is baffling, however, is why all of the ID proponents who believe that the designer is not god have not done so. Is it possible that such people simply don’t exist under the ID tent?Allan Keith
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
09:49 AM
9
09
49
AM
PDT
Eric Anderson @ 17, 18 What you said.doubter
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PDT
LM,
You admit there would be additional constraints, but could you accept that those additional constraints could remove all available solutions to a given naturally selective functional demand?
Yes.
So is it obvious that a designer is so constrained, or not? I don’t know. ID is not prepared to propose any such constraints to the designer. Or rule them out. In short, ID is not prepared to propose anything that can be tested.
Allan Keith
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
09:33 AM
9
09
33
AM
PDT
Seems like everyone is missing the obvious reason for external testicles. Display. This is equally valid if you assume mutation or design. There's a clear and simple advantage in directly showing the amount of reproductive material available. Females, who are notorious window-shoppers, will see where to acquire the most abundant supply in one trip.polistra
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
09:20 AM
9
09
20
AM
PDT
AK @ 9:
The argument of suboptimal design is just one of the many predictions of evolution.
True; but it feels rather shallow and pointless when evolutionists are as comfortable with perfectly optimized systems as they are with bad ones. They aren't offering an actual signature and/or falsification criteria to a theoretical process, but an inference against some set of the alternatives.LocalMinimum
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
09:00 AM
9
09
00
AM
PDT
AK @ 9:
The mechanisms evolution use result in constraints placed on possible “solutions”. Constraints that are not placed on a designer, if he exist.
You admit there would be additional constraints, but could you accept that those additional constraints could remove all available solutions to a given naturally selective functional demand? By what principle can you constrain this set of unknown constraints?
This predicts that some “solutions” will appear as kludges rather than good design.
The appearance of a kludge is meaningless. In algorithm/method/pipeline design, you'll often have a clean and neat idea that simply works better...in your imagination. Assuming it's not actually worse or literally impossible, once in hand you'll have kludged it up yourself with all sorts of necessary details your past, inexperienced self didn't recognize. This is assuming you actually build and learn the things and aren't just staffing the peanut gallery.
In most mammals, the testicles are external because lower temperatures are required for sperm production. But marine mammals don’t have external testicles, so god obviously is not constrained. You could argue that the surrounding water offers them a cooling mechanism that land mammals do not have. Fair enough.
So is it obvious that a designer is so constrained, or not? Without knowledge of how to build even the crudest approximation of such a system, how many factors could we be ignorant of?LocalMinimum
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
08:43 AM
8
08
43
AM
PDT
AK: Are you seriously going down this path of latching onto Lents' bad design line of argumentation? You know you don't have to defend every bad argument the Darwinists put out just as a circle-the-wagon exercise, right? Let's see you actually put some intellectual thought behind the issues before throwing out silly claims that have no substance behind them. I can respect you if you say, "Lents doesn't have any idea what he is talking about, and I recognize that the bad design arguments against design depend on a non sequitur, so I won't go there. But I still believe evolution is true for the following reasons . . ." But don't fall prey to the knee-jerk need to support whatever nonsense some other Darwinist throws out there. You're better than that.Eric Anderson
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
08:06 AM
8
08
06
AM
PDT
I'm so tired of these pathetic bad design arguments. They have an incredibly bad track record from Darwin's day to the present, with items regularly getting knocked off the list as we actually learn what is involved in biological systems -- as opposed to the naive "gee it looks funny" level of analysis the Darwinists use. We've seen this movie over and over, and the bad design proponents are on the wrong side of the trajectory of the evidence, whether we're talking about Dawkins' clueless comments about the mammalian eye or otherwise. The reality is that Lents hasn't a clue -- and hasn't offered any detail -- about how a particular system could be improved from a biological engineering standpoint. And he has even less clue about what would be required from a genetic and programmatic standpoint to implement his (conveniently undefined) solution. All we get is snide "What designer would do that?" comments, coupled with a failure of logic non sequitur "Therefore, evolution must be true!" What a joke. This is such intellectual and academic incompetence. I sincerely feel sorry for his students. The bad design arguments do nothing to substantively inform us about biology. What they do is serve as convenient talking points for those who are already committed to a philosophical position. They also serve as a basic IQ test as we watch who falls for them.Eric Anderson
May 21, 2018
May
05
May
21
21
2018
08:02 AM
8
08
02
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply