Intelligent design not so intelligent... why?

[nobspeople]

Intelligent design doesn't mean, literally, perfect design. But that idea flies out the window (and lands in a steaming pile) when one says the ID was done by a being that's all knowing and all capable (even though the bible may not use those terms, specifically, the idea is there based on the words used).

One would expect said ID to then be flawless, if this was the being's intent.
But any ID we see around us, isn't perfect. Some would say that's 'man's fault' due to original sin. That's an excuse, in all honestly: how can imperfect being thwart (damage, harm, etc) a perfect being's plan?!? It's not possible.

Unless... the perfect being wanted it to be able to be thwarted by these imperfect beings.

Examples of ID not so 'I':
The human eye - plenty of eyes on the planet are better than human eyes: from raptors to squid to shrimp
The human throat - what 'I' creator would make the throat to contain the air AND food passage so close together that can cause choking? Not so 'I' it seems
Testicles - one theory says that animals that jump a lot have external testicles to protect those cells from abdominal pressure, while animals that don't need this protection have internal testicles - why not have all internal testicles? Same question when it comes to 'heat tolerance'.
The fact that evolution has come up with a method to have a body good enough to not cause death before reproduction, too much of the time, versus being created by an infallible creator (aka God).

Some are changing the INTELLIGENT Design to UNDESIRABLE Design, but still shows the makings of ID, which is yet another excuse to justify a POV.

Why do you think ID isn't very 'I'?
Or, why do you think ID is very 'I'?

[Miles]

Intelligent design doesn't mean, literally, perfect design. But that idea flies out the window (and lands in a steaming pile) when one says the ID was done by a being that's all knowing and all capable (even though the bible may not use those terms, specifically, the idea is there based on the words used).

One would expect said ID to then be flawless, if this was the being's intent.

At least by a perfect god, which obviously is not the case, at least when it comes to designing stuff.

1 Sea mammal blowhole. Any animal that spends appreciable time in the ocean should be able to extract oxygen from water via gills. Enlarging the lungs and moving a nostril to the back of the head is a poor work-around.

2 Hyena clitoris. When engorged, this "pseudopenis," which doubles as the birth canal, becomes so hard it can crush babies to death during exit.

3 Kangaroo teat. In order to nurse, the just-born joey, a frail and squishy jellybean, must clamber up Mom's torso and into her pouch for a nipple.

4 Giraffe birth canal. Mama giraffes stand up while giving birth, so baby's entry into the world is a 5-foot drop. Wheeee! Crack.

5 Goliath bird-eating spider exoskeleton. This giant spider can climb trees to hunt very mobile prey. Yet it has a shell so fragile it practically explodes when it falls? Well, at least it can produce silk to make a sail. Oh, wait — it can't!

6 Shark-fetus teeth. A few shark species have live births (instead of laying eggs). The Jaws juniors grow teeth in the womb. The first sibling or two to mature sometimes eat their siblings in utero. Mmm ... siblings.

7 Human stomach. People can digest a lot — except for cellulose, the primary component of plant matter. Why don't we have commensal bacteria in our guts to do it? They're busy helping termites.

8 Slug genitalia. Some hermaphroditic species breed by wrapping their sex organs around each other. If one of said members gets stuck, the slug simply chews it off. What. The. Hell?

9 Quadrupeds. Let's say you're a four-footed animal. Now let's say you get a wound on your back, or an itch, or a bug wandering up there. Tough luck, kid. You probably can't do much about it. Hope there's a low branch around.

10 Narwhal tusk. The unicorn-like protuberance on a male narwhal's head is actually a tooth that erupts through the front of the jaw and keeps on growing, up to 9 feet. Narwhal: "Doc, I have a toothache." Dentist: "Indeed."
source

(If you have any gripe with the list take it up with the author. )


Of course we humans can be just as inept.

Which would make us more god-like wouldn't it? Just like the bible commands:

Matthew 5:48
You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

"Perfect" obviously being a relative term here.

But any ID we see around us, isn't perfect. Some would say that's 'man's fault' due to original sin. That's an excuse, in all honestly: how can imperfect being thwart (damage, harm, etc) a perfect being's plan?!? It's not possible.

Exactly!


.

[1213]

...
Or, why do you think ID is very 'I'?

Because I think everything that God created is good for the purpose.

[Miles]

...
Or, why do you think ID is very 'I'?

Because I think everything that God created is good for the purpose.

God didn't. In fact, he even regretted one of his greatest creations.

Genesis 6:6
And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.

.

[brunumb]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

This is a great little book that addresses many of the faults in human design:

Providing a humorous argument against creationism, this witty book debunks popular theories of intelligent design while showing how science can explain nearly everything, including sinus pain, hedonism, hernias, and morality.

[nobspeople]

...
Or, why do you think ID is very 'I'?

Because I think everything that God created is good for the purpose.

Good and intelligent aren't synonyms in this case

[1213]

...In fact, he even regretted one of his greatest creations.

Genesis 6:6
And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.

.

Yes, but that does not mean humans are not good for what was the intention. People were created with the ability to choose. And that can lead to bad choices. Still, I believe God thinks it is good, even though it can cause sorrow.

[1213]

...
Or, why do you think ID is very 'I'?

Because I think everything that God created is good for the purpose.

Good and intelligent aren't synonyms in this case

Yes, but, if something works logically and purposefully, I think it is intelligently created.

[nobspeople]

...
Or, why do you think ID is very 'I'?

Because I think everything that God created is good for the purpose.

Good and intelligent aren't synonyms in this case

Yes, but, if something works logically and purposefully, I think it is intelligently created.

Logically and purposefully aren't the same, either.

Rhinos have eyes, but poor eyesight.
Ostriches have feathers but can't fly.
Both of these examples are logical and purposeful, but not very intelligent.

[1213]

...
Rhinos have eyes, but poor eyesight.
Ostriches have feathers but can't fly.
Both of these examples are logical and purposeful, but not very intelligent.

Why they are not intelligent? Why should they be something different (intelligent reason)?

I would like to hear also, why in evolution point of view the situation is that, if it is a poor condition. If it is bad for the animal, shouldn’t evolution have made it different?