"Concluding that a body structure is poorly designed,
as Oxford University Ph.D. Professor Hafer claims,
Hafer explained that when she was looking for new approaches to refute Intelligent Design,
she knew she had a winner when in the middle of an Anatomy and Physiology lecture.
she concluded that the male reproduction system is a great first argument against ID. 3
She believed that she also had a good political-style argument against ID."
After watching my father’s battle with prostate cancer I’d have to say yes.
The sharing of urinary and reproductive functions was a very bad design flaw IMHO. The ability to pee is pretty important.
Here's a reminder to those who DON'T bother to read articles before posting....
God is most definitely a woman.
No man would have placed the testicles outside in the open.
IF she is so intelligent then she can start with clay, shape her ideal man and breathe life into him and claim some notoriety. Until then, she can keep her pie hole shut.
Always worked for me!! :)
Also raises the question if evolution is efficient, why would there be flaws? Wouldnt the less efficient flaw be naturally selected away in favor of those better suited to survival?
But if a circular argument by Rowe.
Gee, who would have guessed another ‘scholarly’ (note the quotes to denote sarcasm) article with the thesis that men are defective.
Leftist females like the one mentioned in this article are horrible people.
I'll go ask the wife.
Some questions are only answered by extensive experimentation.
this thread sets up perfectly for an old joke that will kill the thread...
Gene McDaniels has something to sing about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g-iw6EU0Tw
With a sample pool of over 7.5 Billion humans she concludes this?
You mean, like eyes, that are completely encased in... no not eyes.
Oh, you mean ears that don't have any openin... no not ears.
Maybe we should have been in an exo-skeleton???
Its always served me well, and Ive never heard any complaints either. In fact, theres been nothing but praise.
There are some shortcomings.
These evolutionary biologists don’t know they are arguing theology, not science.
Ever see the movie "Enemy Mine"?