I just think science should be understood as it is without introducing a god into it whatsoever.

(May 24, 2016 at 5:36 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(May 24, 2016 at 5:29 pm)AAA Wrote: Well like I said, I know that in humans it branches many times which is essential to its function. I tried google scholar looking for a paper on the extralaryngeal divisions of the giraffe, but I had no luck. If you know where I can find decent information, let me know.

Anyways, to make my point, here is a picture I found showing the divisions of the laryngeal nerve in humans.


Notice all the divisions as it moves back up. These divisions are necessary for breathing and circulation. I bet that this occurs in the giraffe too. If it didn't go down and go under the aortic arch and come back up, then how would it branch off to all these targets?

Thanks for the video. You can even see in it that on the way back up, the nerve branches off multiple times. I trust the knowledge of the anatomist, but they didn't even acknowledge the branches coming off. 1:54, 2:09, 2:30, 2:39. Every time it gives you a close-up you can see an additional branch. Are these branches supposed to just be unimportant? And how has this nerve only been dissected twice?? Are we sure that this anatomy is not essential to its function?

(May 24, 2016 at 5:56 pm)AAA Wrote:

(May 24, 2016 at 5:41 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Are you suggesting that the almighty creator of all existence couldn't?

That's some impotent deity you've got there.

Everything seems to have constraints. I think it is fine where it is. If you are wanting to know why everything is not perfect, then I don't have a answer. It is not logical to say that because everything is not perfect it was not designed. I feel like you guys are trying very hard to move this into a theological debate rather than a biological one.

Dilemma fail.

I'm not saying the design isn't perfect - I design things for a living and I'm full aware that in design "perfect" is the enemy of "good enough".

What I'm saying is that if there is a designer *the designer is incompetent*.

*if not malicious.

(May 24, 2016 at 7:17 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: *if not malicious.

*Looks around at the world*

Maybe the designer has just absented himself from the design due to not giving a hoot.

I am willing to accept that over a fairy tale religious concept of an omnibenevolent individual that cannot care to show itself and depends upon primitive writings as well as primitively minded modern followers to make claim to its existence.

(May 24, 2016 at 7:19 pm)Maelstrom Wrote:

(May 24, 2016 at 7:17 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: *if not malicious.

*Looks around at the world*

Maybe the designer has just absented himself from the design from not giving a hoot.

I guess.

This guy I'm talking to, if you take his line to its logical conclusion, would hold his creator to a lower standard of competency than I would hold one of my junior engineers to.  The tracheal/esophageal interface isn't just not perfect - it's *shit*.

There are more fundamental problems.

If you are designing not just life, but the rules of the reality they live in, why create problems such as death, which can occur in a multitude of ways and is even inevitable? Then you have to get around these issues. Shit, it's gotta eat or it will die. And it has to breathe. And it has to drink. And it has to expel waste...

Now I have to solve all these problems with a load of botched wiring which fucks up regularly.

This is not what I would expect from a competent designer. If I wanted to make some buddies for company, I would create an environment that they would continue to "survive" in as long as I wanted them to without needing anything. I can only imagine God finds our constant struggle to cling to life amusing.

If God has obstacles to get around that he didn't put there, who did put them there? Did he make the rules, or show up one day with a bunch of rules already in place? It's the first when crediting God, and the second when excusing his incompetence/malice.

(May 24, 2016 at 5:56 pm)AAA Wrote: If you are wanting to know why everything is not perfect, then I don't have a answer.

You don't have an answer! What sort of christian are you?  Make it up like the rest of them! hehe

I would have said, it wasn't on the ark, not my problem! checkmate!

In all seriousness though, we actually do have the answer to this. It's what happens when you allow evolution to evolve naturally and blindly and to compensate as it goes. Ugly, messy and barely good enough is mother nature's moto.

"Don't have an answer" is good, but it's better applied before the point you make up loads of unscientific stuff, rather than after. If you're allowed to just say whatever you want without evidence and you still can't make the explanation match reality, you're pretty far off track.

Was life somehow designed or not? I don't have an answer.

Are there any other realities? I don't have an answer.

If there is, was something in another reality responsible for this one? I don't have an answer.

Do I care about these answers? No. Only for scientific curiosity.

(May 24, 2016 at 7:15 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(May 24, 2016 at 5:56 pm)AAA Wrote: Everything seems to have constraints. I think it is fine where it is. If you are wanting to know why everything is not perfect, then I don't have a answer. It is not logical to say that because everything is not perfect it was not designed. I feel like you guys are trying very hard to move this into a theological debate rather than a biological one.

Dilemma fail.

I'm not saying the design isn't perfect - I design things for a living and I'm full aware that in design "perfect" is the enemy of "good enough".

What I'm saying is that if there is a designer *the designer is incompetent*.

So why is the designer incompetent? Because there are flaws? If so, then you are an incompetent designer also. I think I'm missing your point.