Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

I Accept the Theory of Evolution

In a female mammal there is a pair of tubes along which eggs travel from the ovaries to the uterus. These are called the Fallopian Tubes (salpinges). Sometimes when a human egg is ejected from an ovary it does not make it into the fallopian tube. This is because, quite oddly, the fallopian tube is not actually connected to the ovary. Rather, the opening of the fallopian tube envelops the ovary, like a too-large garden hose resting on a too-small spigot. The two are not actually attached, and sometimes an egg gets squirted out of the ovary and into the abdominal cavity instead of into the fallopian tube.

When this happens, it is usually of no consequence. The egg simply dies after a few days and is resorbed by the peritoneum, the thin wall of highly vascular tissue surrounding the abdominal cavity. No problem.

However, if an egg falls into the abdominal cavity and sperm arrives within a day or so, it might find this egg and fertilise it. The resulting embryo, completely unaware of how far it is from home, begins the process of growth, division, and tunnelling into whatever nearby tissue that it can find, usually the peritoneum but occasionally the outer covering of the large or small intestine, liver, or spleen. This is called an abdominal pregnancy

Abdominal pregnancies pose serious risks. In developing countries, they usually result in the death of the mother. In developed countries, they are easily spotted with ultrasounds and treated with surgical intervention to remove the doomed embryo and repair any damaged tissue or bleeding.

Despite creationists’ laughable claims of an ‘intelligent designer’, abdominal pregnancies are 100% the result of unintelligent design. Any reasonable plumber would have attached the fallopian tube to the ovary, thereby preventing tragic and often fatal mishaps. An ‘intelligent designer’ would never have created the small gap between the human ovary and Fallopian tube, so that an egg must cross this gap before it can travel through the tube and implant in the uterus.

In reality, the gap is a remnant of our fish and reptilian ancestors, who shed eggs directly from the ovary to the outside of their bodies. The Fallopian tube is an imperfect connection because it evolved later as an add-on in mammals.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
pratluck · 36-40, M
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@pratluck Yes, it’s remarkable, isn’t it! 😀
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Product of Intelligent Design at work. Evolution wouldn't survive the single cell stage.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 lol! Did you miss the bit about the inept plumber? Not exactly intelligent!
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Have you ever heard of design parameters?
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 are they anything like emergent properties... which don’t require design?
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Emergent properties are set by a designer not and accident. Too funny!!! You really are that oblivious about design work?
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 That makes no sense. If emergent properties were designed, they wouldn’t be emergent properties.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 says who? You? Properties don't exist on their own. They exist by design not accident.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 Yet you run away from discussing emergent properties.

Strange
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 I pointed out properties are from design not accident. Silly people like you don't know that. Too funny!
redredred · M
@hippyjoe1955 Want to prove that assertion?
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 [quote]properties are from design not accident[/quote]

That’s not the case with emergent properties, yet you continue to cower from discussing them.

Just because you ‘point out’ something doesn’t make it valid, doesn’t make it germane, and certainly doesn’t make it right
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Actually it is if know anything about design. I'm not cowering. I am laughing at your naivety. For someone as ignorant as you you sure spend a lot of time spreading/showing your ignorance.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 You continue to talk about design while doggedly running from emergent properties
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Who brought about said properties? They are not the result of an accident. You just don't think things through. Typical atheist. Posts with half you brain absent.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 If you’d discuss emergent properties with me you’d see that your question is incoherent.

Sodium isn’t salty (I recommend you don’t put any on your tongue to test that), and chlorine isn’t salty. Combine them, and then put them on your tongue. Whence the saltiness?

Accidental saltiness? lol?
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 If you knew what properties were you wouldn't make that silly comment.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 What are properties, as you apparently know what they are?
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 You don't know? Wow.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 [quote]If you knew what properties were you wouldn't make that silly comment[/quote]

You made that statement without knowing what properties are?

If you don’t know what properties are, how can you know what I do and do not know about properties?

You’re becoming incoherent again.

Let’s get back to emergent properties, and perhaps there you’ll regain a degree of rationality
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 If you knew anything at all you would realize that properties are not the result of an accident. They are the result of design. The whole emergent properties is nonsense perpetuated by atheists fooling themselves into thinking they know something. Sadly they are clueless. Life exists therefore abiogenesis kind of nonsense. Absolutely no evidence but an article of faith for atheists. I don't have enough faith to be an atheist. My brain wants to know the where and the why. Atheism has no answers, just articles of faith. Illogical faith but blind unchanging faith nonetheless.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Silly question for you: Why are all of your theories antique? Darwin 1859. Emergent Properties was popular in 1925 and faded ever since. Very strange. Don't you have anything more up to date? Oh right. Of course not. The cutting edge research is now indicating a Creator/Design not random chance and circumstance. It must really suck to be stuck with those ancient and abandoned theories like Darwin and emergent properties. Even more so now that they are being abandoned by the more intelligent among us.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@hippyjoe1955 You think they are going to revieuw Newtons' laws in physics soon? Are they expiring somewhere soon Joe?
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@Kwek00 It pretty much has. Gravity has been rethought completely. I guess you wouldn't know that because it involves science.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@hippyjoe1955 that's true, when I learned Newtons' laws in school, it was actually some other guy that reviewed them all.

Fucking idiot talks about outdated models but worships a 3000 old god from a tribe that lived somewhere in the desert. You are a joke Joe