Design flaws in organisms indicate evolution, not intelligent design

[Compassionist]

The existence of design flaws in living organisms is often cited as evidence for evolution by natural selection rather than intelligent design by an all-loving, all-knowing, and all-powerful deity. If such a being existed and created life intentionally, we might expect optimal design yet what we see instead are structures and processes that are inefficient, prone to failure, or even harmful.
Here are some significant biological design flaws that point to evolution rather than perfect design:
________________________________________
1. Human Birth Canal vs. Big Brain
Flaw: Human babies have large heads due to our large brains, but the human pelvis is narrow for bipedal walking.
Result: Childbirth is extremely painful and dangerous a leading cause of death historically.
Evolutionary Explanation: Our ancestors evolved larger brains and upright walking separately, leading to a dangerous compromise.
________________________________________
2. Wisdom Teeth
Flaw: Most people don't have room for third molars, causing impaction, infections, and pain.
Result: Many need surgery to remove them.
Evolutionary Explanation: Our ancestors had larger jaws due to diet, but modern humans' jaws shrank faster than tooth evolution could keep up.
________________________________________
3. Human Retina Is Backward
Flaw: The photoreceptor cells in the human eye are behind layers of neurons and blood vessels.
Result: Creates a blind spot and reduces image quality.
Evolutionary Explanation: The eye evolved incrementally, not from a clean-slate design.
________________________________________
4. Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve (Giraffe Example)
Flaw: This nerve travels from the brain to the larynx, but loops around the aorta.
Result: In giraffes, it travels over 15 feet instead of a direct path of a few inches.
Evolutionary Explanation: It's a leftover from fish ancestors, where this path made sense. Evolution modified existing structures rather than redesigning from scratch.
________________________________________
5. Human Menstrual Cycle
Flaw: Humans shed the uterine lining even if not pregnant, wasting resources and causing pain.
Result: Menstrual cramps, anemia, mood changes.
Evolutionary Explanation: Other mammals reabsorb the lining. Our approach may have evolved due to pathogen risks in internal fertilization.
________________________________________
6. Shared Path for Food and Air
Flaw: The esophagus (food) and trachea (air) share an entrance.
Result: Risk of choking a leading accidental cause of death.
Evolutionary Explanation: The throat evolved in stages, without foresight.
________________________________________
7. Human Spine and Back Pain
Flaw: Our spine is an S-curve not ideally suited for upright walking.
Result: Many people suffer chronic back pain, herniated discs, etc.
Evolutionary Explanation: Our ancestors were quadrupeds. The upright posture evolved later, leading to inefficient structure.
________________________________________
8. Brain Vulnerability and Mental Illness
Flaw: The brain is highly energy-consuming and prone to many dysfunctions.
Result: High rates of depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, etc.
Evolutionary Explanation: Natural selection favored reproductive success, not mental wellness or long-term wellbeing.
________________________________________
9. Knee Joint Design
Flaw: Knees bear immense strain, especially the ACL (anterior cruciate ligament), which often tears.
Result: Common injuries in sports and aging.
Evolutionary Explanation: Knees evolved from quadruped ancestors, not optimally engineered for bipedal running and jumping.
________________________________________
10. Genetic "Junk" and Mutations
Flaw: The genome is full of non-coding or redundant DNA and is prone to harmful mutations.
Result: Genetic diseases, cancer, and congenital defects.
Evolutionary Explanation: DNA accumulates "baggage" over time. There's no intelligent editing or streamlining process.
________________________________________
11. Susceptibility to Cancer
Flaw: Cells divide for life but are prone to mutations that cause cancer.
Result: One of the top global causes of death.
Evolutionary Explanation: Cell division is essential for life, but natural selection can't eliminate all cancer risk especially after reproductive age.
________________________________________
12. Human Psychology Biases
Flaw: We are prone to cognitive biases (e.g., confirmation bias, tribalism, overconfidence).
Result: Misjudgments, discrimination, and conflict.
Evolutionary Explanation: These evolved to enhance survival in specific environments, not to produce truth-seeking rationality.
________________________________________
If we were designed by an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent being, such flaws are impossible to justify. Evolution by natural selection, on the other hand, explains these quirks and imperfections as the result of a messy, blind, trial-and-error process where old parts are tweaked, not replaced, and survival/reproduction, not perfection, is the end goal.

[Carnivalfaces]

[Replying to RBD in post #260]

Oh, life was most definitely created. Our presence demonstrates the fact. No evidence however suggest your god magically created it.

[RBD]

Evolution happens to populations, not individuals.

This is the excuse argument for no individual fish fossil never producing an amphibian fossil.

You see biological evolution is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time. No individual organism evolves into something else.

Correct. Simple biological evolution is proven science. Evolution between different class of species is unproven theory, and mostly ideology. You say it's false altogether, and I'll agree.

And of course, your expectation that a fossil could produce another fossil rather bizarre.

I've never heard of dead fossils producing anything, much less more fossils. You need to learn that the fossil record is of changes from one living generation to another, that leave a fossil trail of those evolutionary changes within a single class of species.

The follow up excuse argument, is that it takes so many millions of years to evolve from a fish to an amphibian, that the missing fossil link between a fish and an amphibian can't be found, yet...

There are many, many such examples. Even honest YECs admit that these exist:[/quote]

Only fanciful dreamers and/or ideologues say something exists, that is not proven to exist, because it's never yet found.

The great fossil gaps between any evolution of different species, have not been found. It's more sensible to conclude they do not exist, rather than insist they do exist...

Evidences for Darwin’s second expectation — of stratomorphic intermediate species — include such species as Baragwanathia27 (between rhyniophytes and lycopods), Pikaia28 (between echinoderms and chordates), Purgatorius29 (between the tree shrews and the primates), and Proconsul30 (between the non-hominoid primates and the hominoids). Darwin’s third expectation — of higher-taxon stratomorphic intermediates — has been confirmed by such examples as the mammal-like reptile groups31 between the reptiles and the mammals, and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed ancestors. Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series — has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33 the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 the various mammal series of the Cenozoic37 (for example, the horse series, the camel series, the elephant series, the pig series, the titanothere series, etc.), the Cantius and Plesiadapus primate series,38 and the hominid series.39 Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact.
YEC Dr. Kurt Wise, Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms

There are many transitional forms between fish and tetrapods:
https://www.earthhistory.org.uk/transit ... er-v-dover

Darwin's necessary logical expectation of finding the minute fossil transitions between different classes of species; Fish to amphibian. Primate to man. etc... have never been found.

Speciation between different species therefore, is not proven as simple biological evolution within a species.

You see biological evolution is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time. No individual organism evolves into something else.

Correct.

[RBD]

[Replying to Compassionist in post #1]

What you call "design flaws" in creation are a result of evil and as such, they are not design flaws. Much of what you consider to be "flaws" are in fact, the best way to ensure the survival of living forms of life within a reality of good and evil.

Not true. All natural things are simply created mortally flawed. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, simply means that nothing naturally created by God can live forever, whether celestial or terrestrial.

The main problem with modern atheism is the inability to recognize invented language terminology that doesn't exist in reality. For example, there is no such thing as "nature" or the "natural world." Rather, all of the known evidence clearly demonstrates deliberate design and creation. Thus, in reality, the only thing that exists is "creation", not an invented "natural world", which is clearly just a human construct; a lie invented to explain away the obvious, that we live within a created cosmic reality.

I understand your point, that an immortal evolving universe without beginning, is false pagan theology and pseudo evolutionary science.

However, God does create the natural universe and speaks of it as being nature with natural power:

Deu 34:7
And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.

1Co 11:14
Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

1Co 15:44
It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

There is the natural world of stars, sun, moon, earth, and living creatures on earth. There is also the immortal spiritual things of the kingdom of God.

In fact, there is zero evidence that anything can randomly exist unto itself, let alone something as overwhelmingly complex as the universe and life contained therein.

Correct. It's only an assumption that natural things exist of their own power without beginning nor end, and without intelligent power of the Creator to hold all things naturally together;

Col 1:16
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Heb 1:3
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power,

The assumption of noncreation, is that once any thing takes up natural space, then it must always take up space, and must always have taken up space. The 2nd law of thermodynamics is only theory, because it can only be law if there is no creation of natural things; Which of course cannot be proven by any natural law.

There is also the obvious flaw to all atheism. Their uncreated natural universe must also account for intelligence, which if not created then must also be everlasting without beginning. Therefore, the only two options for an uncreated universe with intelligence, is either old pagan Deism, or the Creator without beginning, that creates all things from the beginning, both the natural things of the universe, and the spiritual things of intelligence.

[RBD]

[Replying to Compassionist in post #3]

So-called "junk" DNA has been clearly debunked by modern scientists themselves. Much of DNA consists of non-coding "switches", originally thought to be "junk" but later determined to be completely and entirely necessary to the organism involved. One of the best examples is the difference between humans and chimpanzees, which is small regarding coding DNA, but immense regarding "switching" DNA.

Exactly. With all the many 'similarities' studies, such as chromosome count, the primate-man evolutionists negate the single difference, rather than logically conclude, that there is no match between any living primate and human, nor fossil record.

I.e. the one chromosome difference makes all the difference in the world, so that man is not ape and vica versa. Rather than dismissing the difference as meaningless between man and ape. I've ceased following all their 'similarities' links, because they all conclude the same thing, close but no cigar. Almost only counts in horse shoes...

We see how ideologues corrupt scientific fact, by claiming it on the one hand, and then dismissing the obvious conclusion on the other.

All the physical and biological similarities between any creature on earth, only proves the Scripture, that all natural things are made of 'dust DNA'. But creation in God's image is spiritual intelligence, which no animal on earth has.

It is the switching DNA that separates all living forms of life and which makes humans very different from chimps. Such "switches" are not "junk" as you very wrongly claim.

Disproving Junk DNA can be found here, quoting actual practicing scientists:
www.FreedomTracks.com/science.html

Do you yourself want to explain more on switch DNA verses junk for me? What do you think of the euphemism of dust DNA.

[RBD]

So-called "junk" DNA has been clearly debunked by modern scientists themselves. ....

Good. But, by what I know, it is still claimed that there is lot of mutations and rudiments, which indicates things were intact before and things are degenerating from the original good state.

What science is this, that proves natural things were ever nondegenerative immortal? The law of natural decay proves that all things are presently decaying, because all natural things are flawed.

Which BTW does not disprove creation with uncreated random selection. If all natural things were indeed completely random, the the chance of producing nondecaying immortal things becomes exponentially necessary. The fact that all things are naturally decaying as by law, proves a Creator must make all natural things decay by law, without any possible random exception...

The natural universe is indeed all mortally decaying, but not randomly, and so must be by design.

And there's no Bible for any created naturally incorruptible. All things were created naturally mortal from the beginning. Nowhere is any natural thing created by God immortally. The only reason the bodies of man and woman can live indefinitely is by the fruit of life. Which was removed from the earth by the flood, but will be growing again on the new earth for the righteous nations to eat in the Lamb's eternal city:

Rev 22:2
In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

[RBD]

So-called "junk" DNA has been clearly debunked by modern scientists themselves.

That's simply not true. There are sequences that we know are non-functional, including some that you don't want to start functioning

All natural things have nonfunctional sequences in the end, since all things are naturally decaying and mortal.

Which proves it must be by design, and cannot be by random selection alone. Otherwise, there would be the inevitable random selection of naturally incorruptible and immortally functional things.

The fact that all natural things are only one way: Nonfunctional mortality. Proves it must be by design, not by random chance alone.

And that design must be by intelligent will, since random chance cannot make such a design law of natural decay for all natural things, without any possible random chance alternative.

[RBD]

[Replying to RBD in post #260]

Oh, life was most definitely created. Our presence demonstrates the fact. No evidence however suggest your god magically created it.

I know there are still plenty of pagan desists of uncreated Gods and men. It's the only other option than the one true God and Creator of all angels and men.

It's only an uncreated evolving nature and intelligence, without the Gods, that is dysfunctional denial of one's own intelligence. Since intelligence does exist, then it must either be created with beginning: made in God's image. Or uncreated without beginning: the primordial Gods.

Only nonexistent intelligence can neither be created, nor without any beginning.

[RBD]

And so in the end, we see that the original claim is debunked: No response is given to the necessary challenge against random chance alone for a wholly corruptible universe, where nothing natural exists, that is nondegenerative and immortal.

The existence of design flaws in living organisms is often cited as evidence for evolution by natural selection rather than intelligent design by an all-loving, all-knowing, and all-powerful deity. If such a being existed and created life intentionally, we might expect optimal design

1. A perfect Creator is also free to create things corruptible by design. Expectation would suggest natural things are all made incorruptible and immortal.

2. The fact that all natural things are only corruptible, without any example of random incorruptibility, proves corruptible natural things must be by design.

3. The law of natural degeneration is true for all natural things, and so must be made by design, else the law of natural degeneration would be disproven by something naturally nondegenerative and immortal: random chance demands a random possibility of incorruptible natural things. Otherwise, random is no more by chance alone, but is limited by design...

If we were designed by an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent being, such flaws are impossible to justify. Evolution by natural selection, on the other hand, explains these quirks and imperfections as the result of a messy, blind, trial-and-error process where old parts are tweaked, not replaced, and survival/reproduction, not perfection, is the end goal.

Since all natural things have only one end goal mortal decay, then it's not blind, but sees only one end goal. People knowing all our natural bodies are decaying to mortality, is proof of intelligence in this universe, that is not blind to the end goal of all natural things. Nor blind to that end goal must be by intelligent design, in order by natural law to forbid any random chance of naturally nondegenerative immortality.

[Jose Fly]

Evolution between different class of species is unproven theory, and mostly ideology.

How do you know?

Only fanciful dreamers and/or ideologues say something exists, that is not proven to exist, because it's never yet found.

The great fossil gaps between any evolution of different species, have not been found. It's more sensible to conclude they do not exist, rather than insist they do exist...

What specific taxa are you referring to?

Darwin's necessary logical expectation of finding the minute fossil transitions between different classes of species; Fish to amphibian. Primate to man. etc... have never been found.

You're either deliberately misquoting Darwin or doing so out of ignorance. Darwin posed the question of why there isn't perfect representation of the entire history of life, and then answered that question later in his book. So you're citing the question while either deliberately or mistakenly omitting the answer.

Speciation between different species therefore, is not proven as simple biological evolution within a species.

?????? You're not even making sense. Just above you indicated that you were ok with evolution within a taxonomic class, but now you're questioning evolution of new species? Do you not understand basic taxonomy?

[Jose Fly]

Exactly. With all the many 'similarities' studies, such as chromosome count, the primate-man evolutionists negate the single difference, rather than logically conclude, that there is no match between any living primate and human, nor fossil record.

I.e. the one chromosome difference makes all the difference in the world, so that man is not ape and vica versa. Rather than dismissing the difference as meaningless between man and ape. I've ceased following all their 'similarities' links, because they all conclude the same thing, close but no cigar. Almost only counts in horse shoes...

Again, you're not even making sense. Are you expecting the human genome to be the same as other primates or something?

We see how ideologues corrupt scientific fact, by claiming it on the one hand, and then dismissing the obvious conclusion on the other.

How did you manage to become such a high level expert in both genetics and paleontology?