The Gods Were Incompetent

39 posts / 0 new

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 07:23

ronald bertram

Posted: "As someone who has given birth, I nominate the narrow pelvis as a terrible “design” feature."

As a registered seedstock Simmental Breeder, pelvic form and function is a trait we carefully select for. All my retained heifers are "Pelvic Scored". At one year of age and prior to breeding, I have a Veterinarian perform a pelvic score on all my retained heifers. The score is expressed in Square Centimeters. It is the product of the height of the birth canal and the width of the birth canal. The minimum that I will keep is 140 square centimeters. Any below that are sold in the feeder market which means they do not become breeding stock. I rarely have to assist during partum. Obviously, the practice would be frowned on if applied to humans.

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 03:52

#33

Lion IRC

If I say there is fine tuning

If I say there is fine tuning I will be accused of anthropic bias.
What accusation can I make of the person who sees a 'badly designed' universe?

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 05:13

(Reply to #33) #34

ronald bertram

@Lion IRC

My horse is not in that race. I don't involve myself in others' values, philosophy or beliefs. I engage in these subjects only for the opportunity it provides me to express myself and for entertainment.

I didn't mean to imply that that the Universe is designed badly. I was only casually expressing my observations about what I consider flaws.

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 05:28

(Reply to #34) #35

David Killens

@ Lion IRC

"What accusation can I make of the person who sees a 'badly designed' universe?"

If you can attack and destroy the contents of the post, you will have earned respect. If you just launch ad hominem attacks on the poster and ignore the content of the post, then you are a fool and mangy cur.

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 18:19

(Reply to #35) #36

algebe

@Lion IRC: What accusation

@Lion IRC: What accusation can I make of the person who sees a 'badly designed' universe?

The universe only appears badly designed if you believe that it was designed specifically for us. And that's a grand folly when you compare the size and age of the universe with the size and age of us.

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 05:27

#37

ronald bertram

What about the human foreskin

What about the human male foreskin? Perhaps early hominids benefited from the extra protection it provided for the glans penis but certainly not after the rise of more contemporary hominids.

The benefits are limited if nonexistent but the benefits of circumcision have been documented by the medical profession. An excerpt:

1. A decreased risk of urinary tract infections.
2. A reduced risk of some sexually transmitted diseases in men.
3. Protection against penile cancer and a reduced risk of cervical cancer in female sex partners.
4. Prevention of balanitis (inflammation of the glans) and balanoposthitis (inflammation of the glans and foreskin).
5. Prevention of phimosis (the inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (the inability to return the foreskin to its original location).

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 12:48

(Reply to #37) #38

LogicFTW

@Bright Raven

@Bright Raven
You missed the number one benefit of human male foreskin. Increased pleasurable sensation during sex. As you mentioned earlier in the thread, our evolutionary "goal" is to reproduce. Making sex more desirable is a major component of that goal.

Also, foreskin removal (for most of history in most part of the world) greatly increase the chance of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome.) The amount of blood loss from even a carefully done circumcision of a newborn baby is actually signficant and raises mortality rates.

Foreskin may not be well designed and mostly useless for the modern human in first world societies, with some of the benefits you list maybe making it worthwhile especially for the guy that insist upon doing unprotected sex with lots of partners.

But at the very least, I think the practice of circumcision should be abolished anywhere that people do not have access to modern healthcare. But "religious freedom" will ensure this mostly barbaric practice continues.

Wed, 03/04/2020 - 13:48

(Reply to #38) #39

boomer47

@LogicFTW

"But at the very least, I think the practice of circumcision should be abolished anywhere that people do not have access to modern healthcare. But "religious freedom" will ensure this mostly barbaric practice continues."

2 cents

There is arguably some health benefit from male circumcision in dry climates with people who have poor static hygiene EG Bronze age tribal nomads in the Middle East.

Imo female circumcision is simply disgusting and is rightly banned in civilised countries.

According to my mum, about 3 days after I was born, the nurse ANNOUNCED. "We're going to circumcise baby today" . This was common practice in Australian hospitals at the time.

A relatively unknown danger from traditional Jewish circumcisions performed by a Mohel, which is the title the the person who perform the bris.; The mohel takes the baby's penis in his mouth to stem the bleeding. Of course, some babies have died due to various infections a moher might have

Today, I understand Muslims have the highest rate of religious circumcisions. The US has the highest number of non religious and non medical circumcisions.

I have always liked my circumcised willy, it's tidy.

I have no idea how much circumcision effects sensation. Not something I've ever thought much about. It's not as if I can do anything about it.

Overall, I consider male and female circumcisions barbaric mutilations and think both should be banned. .

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.

You are here

Pages