Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The why are human beings so adapted poorly for survival?
Perhaps you should ask your god who you claim designed us 'intelligently'.
Quote:
Even primates have better survival physical bodies. They are stronger physically and have thick padded feet.
So would we if we didn't wear shoes.
Quote:
Human beings? Without shoes, our feet would be a mess.
No they wouldn't. Quite the opposite actually. I walk around the house with no shoes and the soles of my feet are very hard.
Quote:
Why would evolution evolve humans with weaker feet...
It doesn't. We have weaker feet because we prevent them, via the use of shoes and socks, from being tough.
Quote:
...and sensitive skin that burns easily under the sun?
People who's genealogy runs through hot sunny countries do not burn. Their skin has evolved not to burn. Isn't evolution wonderful?
Quote:
Looks like the opposite should have occurred.
To someone like you that prefers to remain wilfully ignorant regarding what evolution does and says...perhaps it would appear so.
Quote:
Human beings are much more susceptible to disease and cancer than even our supposely primate relatives.
That is because, due to our over-protection against 'germs' we are loosing our immunity to illness and disease. Evolution in action again.
Quote:
If we really evolved from primates then evolution really sucks at survival.
We didn't evolve from primates. We ARE primates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Sorry, I don't buy that argument for a second. Why would evolution take away superior traits and give us something unique, the human brain in replacement. Why not a superior brain while keeping the superior traits?
...because evolution doesn't work like that. Yet again you display your ignorance of evolution. Evolution doesn't claim that we will always 'improve' What it claims is that organisms will adapt to their current environment and will do so with the least expenditure of resources and energy possible. As an example, there is no reason to get more "more intelligent" if this is not required. Intelligence requires resources and if intelligence is not really required it will be lost.
Some animals still have structures that clearly used to be eyes, but they do not function any more as eyes. Eyes also take resources and if an animal migrates to an environment where eyes are useless and breeds there then over time we expect the eyes to evolve out of them.
There is no linear concept of "better" in evolution as you seem to think nor any expectation that evolution should follow some subjective path which you define as "better". An organism will happily get "worse" if in doing so it uses less resources and survives just as well.
Quote:
Your statement that God is an awful designer only points to skeptic's arrogance.
Your god is an appalling designer.
In the human female, a fertilized egg can implant into the fallopian tube, cervix or ovary rather than the uterus causing an ectopic pregnancy. The existence of a cavity between the ovary and the fallopian tube could indicate a flawed design in the female reproductive system. Prior to modern surgery, ectopic pregnancy invariably caused the deaths of both mother and baby. Even in modern times, in almost all cases the pregnancy must be aborted to save the life of the mother.
In the human female, the birth canal passes through the pelvis. The prenatal skull will deform to a surprising extent. However, if the baby's head is significantly larger than the pelvic opening, the baby cannot be born naturally. Prior to the development of modern surgery (caesarean section), such a complication would lead to the death of the mother, the baby, or both. Other birthing complications such as breech birth are worsened by this position of the birth canal.
In the human male, testes develop initially within the abdomen. Later during gestation, they migrate through the abdominal wall into the *******. This causes two weak points in the abdominal wall where hernias can later form. Prior to modern surgical techniques, complications from hernias, including intestinal blockage, gangrene, etc., usually resulted in death.[7]
The existence of the pharynx, a passage used for both ingestion and respiration, with the consequent drastic increase in the risk of choking.
The breathing reflex is stimulated not directly by the absence of oxygen but rather indirectly by the presence of carbon dioxide. A result is that, at high altitudes, oxygen deprivation can occur in unadapted individuals who do not consciously increase their breathing rate.
Barely used nerves and muscles, such as the plantaris muscle of the foot,[8] that are missing in part of the human population and are routinely harvested as spare parts if needed during operations. Another example is the muscles that move the ears, which some people can learn to control to a degree, but serve no purpose in any case ([1] p. 328).
The common malformation of the human spinal column, leading to scoliosis, sciatica and congenital misalignment of the vertebrae.
Almost all animals and plants synthesize their own vitamin C, but humans cannot because the gene for this enzyme is defective (Pseudogene ΨGULO).[9] Lack of vitamin C results in scurvy and eventually death. The gene is also non-functional in other primates and in guinea pigs, but is functional in most other animals.[10]
Crowded teeth and poor sinus drainage, as human faces are significantly flatter than those of other primates and humans share the same tooth set. This results in a number of problems, most notably with wisdom teeth.
The structure of humans' eyes (as well as those of all vertebrates). The retina is 'inside out'. The nerves and blood vessels lie on the surface of the retina instead of behind it as is the case in many invertebrate species. This arrangement forces a number of complex adaptations and gives mammals a blind spot. (See Evolution of the eye).
Let's face it, if you're the male cohort of the human species, you're well aware that the only organ that is external to the human body, are your testicles. All your other sensitive and vulnerable organs are well inside your body cavity protected.
The question becomes why? Well the scientific answer is that the human testicles have to be cooler the normal body temperature otherwise sperm will not be produced. Now the strange part about that is, that many mammals have internal testicles including rhinoceroses, all marine mammals, and elephants. Even more interesting is, that birds have internal testicles, and their body temperature is higher than humans.
If there was an intelligent designer out there, why would that designer make humans handicapped, yet be able to make rhinoceros testicles that can be internal?
No I'm making the assumption that natural selection should retain the advantageous traits, not discard them.
...and you make that assumption because you don't have even a basic understanding of the ToE. Not only don't you understand the evidence that we have for evolution, you don't even understand what the ToE claims. You display the typical ignorance found in evolution denying fundies.
Threads that touch on evolution are always interesting -- they reveal that a poster's ignorance of evolutionary biology is usually directly correlated with the degree to which they rail against it.
Let's face it, if you're the male cohort of the human species, you're well aware that the only organ that is external to the human body, are your testicles. All your other sensitive and vulnerable organs are well inside your body cavity protected.
The question becomes why? Well the scientific answer is that the human testicles have to be cooler the normal body temperature otherwise sperm will not be produced. Now the strange part about that is, that many mammals have internal testicles including rhinoceroses, all marine mammals, and elephants. Even more interesting is, that birds have internal testicles, and their body temperature is higher than humans.
If there was an intelligent designer out there, why would that designer make humans handicapped, yet be able to make rhinoceros testicles that can be internal?
I just read the first page of this thread so this may have been already stated but I'm just not thinking the rhinoceros gets kicked in the ba**s much.
The only time that Creationism contradicts Evolution is in the Bible.
The Bible: Written by men to be read by man. Go outside that box & Creationism actually supports Evolution. Fundamentalism should be called "Bible-ism" because it's Bible-worship. Very different from Faith.
Last edited by coschristi; 08-26-2016 at 10:58 AM..
Reason: added to
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
