Atheism vs. God's Existence

[AAA]

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.

It's one thing to believe that evolution is capable of leading to life. It's another thing to assert that life is barely good enough. It is truly amazing. I don't think you realize how amazing biological systems are from the molecular level up to the level of the ecosystem. You don't have to think it was designed, but don't say it's ugly, messy, and barely good enough.

[FatAndFaithless]

Erm...evolution didn't lead to life. That's abiogenesis.

[Gemini]

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.

There's design that's less than perfect, and then there's design that gets people killed. In the former, the designer is human. Nobody's perfect. In the latter, the designer is incompetent (or malicious).

[AAA]

*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*.

I ask again, where would a professional designer such as yourself put the esophagus?

[AAA]

Erm...evolution didn't lead to life.  That's abiogenesis.

Obviously, thanks

[AAA]

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.

There's design that's less than perfect, and then there's design that gets people killed. In the former, the designer is human. Nobody's perfect. In the latter, the designer is incompetent (or malicious).

Where would you put the esophagus then? I bet that wherever you want to put it would lead to more problems than it would solve. Just be thankful that someone managed to have an epiglottis back when the interface first evolved, or else every single member of the species would have choked to death.

[Pat Mustard]

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.

A designer that can create a creature who can choke to death on a pretzel is so incompetent he makes Baldrick look like a genius.

[Gemini]

Where would you put the esophagus then? I bet that wherever you want to put it would lead to more problems than it would solve. Just be thankful that someone managed to have an epiglottis back when the interface first evolved, or else every single member of the species would have choked to death.

It's not obvious that problems would arise from separating the respiratory system from the digestive system.

[robvalue]

I wouldn't put it anywhere since my creation wouldn't need to eat or breathe in order to not die.

You're talking like God has restrictions to work around. Where did these come from?

[Mister Agenda]

There's design that's less than perfect, and then there's design that gets people killed. In the former, the designer is human. Nobody's perfect. In the latter, the designer is incompetent (or malicious).

Where would you put the esophagus then? I bet that wherever you want to put it would lead to more problems than it would solve. Just be thankful that someone managed to have an epiglottis back when the interface first evolved, or else every single member of the species would have choked to death.

One: That's a good question. Our trachea is enlarged to allow speech, 'pushing' both the trachea and the esophagus farther down our throats. Our upright postures make them nearly vertical. That means there's a good chance of food or drink going down 'the wrong tube' if the epiglottis doesn't cover the trachea in time, causing choking. I have neither sufficient biology or engineering knowledge to know how to improve on this system; but a plumber might.

Two: That's bullshit. It's not like our ancestors would have all stood on their hind legs one day with a huge trachea already formed and would have all choked to death on the first apple they ate while standing upright. All three things: upright posture, enlarged trachea, and epiglottis would have evolved gradually together. The epiglottis permitted humans to stand more upright and have more 'swollen' tracheas, and it's evolution was probably driven by a fairly low choking mortality rate, though likely considerably higher than it is currently (about .8 in 100 deaths), though even that would be enough to select for another favorable mutation of the epiglottis, if there's still room for improvement there.