Saturday, 6 August 2016

Intelligent Design?


The folk who promote 'intelligent design' as a means for biological change will wax lyrical about the perfection of the human body and parts contained therein as evidence of god's handiwork. We are supposed to accept that an invisible god by means unknown caused life to come into effect and become perfection as exemplified in the human body? And this is supposed to be accepted as a rival 'scientific theory' to evolution and should be taught as part of the legitimate science curriculum in schools? I would rather burn down the school to stop this from happening. By the way, the conflagration of my alma mater, Tipton Secondary Modern, the day after I left was simply a weird and uncanny coincidence. And anyway, I had a caste iron alibi so them crafty Peelers could never pin the caper on me, although they did sorely try. Sorry, I'm starting to digress and reminisce. So what can we say about the design of the human body and what does it tell us about the supreme artificer himself?

I'll take the prostate gland as an example. This walnut sized gland nestles quaintly in the lower abdomen and encases the tube (urethra) which passes from the bladder to the penis. This cheeky little gland is responsible for supplying fluid for the ejaculate. It is said that a man can experience great pleasure if the gland is manipulated trans-rectally. However, this is something I know nothing about and consequently will mention said topic, nevermore, except to state that a great deal of lube is required (arse, big sore arse).  

At first glance, everything in the design department seems all well and good, even peachy. A gland designed to perform a particular task which it does with veritable aplomb and die hard efficiency. The problem arises as we age. As men reach their mature years there is a tendency for the prostate to enlarge and become knobbly. At a certain stage the engorged prostatic tissue will start to impinge on the relatively narrow urethra squeezing and crushing until the afflicted male experiences the unpleasant symptom of restrained micturition. I have never experienced this problem myself although I have heard that it is enough to turn a sane man into a god and back again in a single night, with all the trappings of extreme suffering. Read the Bible and you will see what I mean. Frequent toilet breaks are required to squeeze pitiful drops of scalding urine from a painfully distended bladder. Eventually drugs no longer control the situation and a visit to the surgeon is necessary to return the urethra to some form of useful patency. So you have got to ask why a so-called loving, all knowing, all powerfull deity would have purposely designed such an organ with an inbuilt propensity to enlarge as we approach our dotage? Is the Lord possessed of a wicked sense of humour? Mayhap this obvious design flaw was overlooked during the planning stage. Of course, we can never remonstrate with god because he is invisible and not prone to chatter with the likes of mere mortals. But it clearly shows that god, if he truly deserves the designation, is not so perfect after all.     

I am not a practical man, my talents lie elsewhere. Whenever a shelf is to be put up or a deck to be stained I turn to my son in law. However, even I can see that the prostate gland should have been placed elsewhere. I'm thinking a little to the left and behind the urethra without encirclement. With expansion there would be a little benign nudging thus allowing old men to sleep soundly without frequent and exquisite trips to the pisser.  

There is another possible scenario which is not usually considered by laity and turbulent priests alike. Could it possibly be that god is actually a 'women' with a grievance against all mankind? Or maybe evolution is at work. An evolutionary shaping which makes do and adapts elder existing structures to new roles as function demands. A force which shapes organisms within certain biological restrictions and constraints. We therefore end up with a patchwork of body parts, spare parts included, which could no doubt be improved upon by an omniscient, omnipotent designer, if only we could find one. 

No comment required




  1. My wife reckons that God IS a woman, and one with a sense of humour. Who else but a woman would give a man a brain and a penis but only enough blood to operate one at a time?

    1. Your wife is a wise woman and has insight into the male psyche. My wife reckons I can hold only three concepts in my befuddled nogin: Katy Perry, jelly wrestling and Katy Perry jelly wrestling. Go figure. Us men are wretched and simple creatures.

  2. Another thing to think of: Why are our eyes inside out? If I was designing an optical system, the lens would cause the light to fall directly on the receptors, not through blood vessels first. Unlike the Cephalopoda who seem to have got it right. Now why would a sensible designer do that? Unless they are like British Leyland (bless 'em) and creating an 'Allegro' from the parts bin. Which may explain a lot.

    Like: Why do Muslim Women have to wear a burkha? 'Cos in Old Mo's eyes they would be over age....

    1. Too true Tony. Most mammalian bits and pieces could be improved upon by a competent architect. Years ago, when I didn't know any better, I used to 'debate' religious folk concerning 'Intelligent Design' etc. But of course you can't debate with these people and the last thing they want to do is to reply rationally. Ain't dat the sad truth.