Silly Design Institute: Let's discuss BOTH sides of the Design Controversy...

Thanks. I've bookmarked it for reference. Of course this shows Silly Design features in the flounders.The IDists need to consider all the evidence and both sides of the flounder ... er, design controversy.Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I think my favorite example of silly design relates to genetalia.What kind of idiot engineer would run a waste disposal system through a recreational area?Also, some years ago, I heard something about an animal (rabbit perhaps?) that has to eat its own feces from the morning to be able to digest food because a necessary enzyme is produced in the wrong place in the digestive tract. Does anyone have a reference for that?This may be my favorite thread of all time.(Proud member of the Silly Design Institute)

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

Look away, girls-----or put the intake so close to the exhaust! :-p

I don't know. But that engineer is probably working for the White House.

The proximity of the organs of love and excretion has a long literary history: as expressions of revulsion, as a metaphor for our supposedly "dual" nature--angels of love who lust and shit--and sometimes as a reminder of mortality. Here's one of my favorite bits from W.B. Yeats, where it is put to somewhat different use:

---

God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ”Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’
--Ann Coulter, Fox-TV: Hannity & Colmes, 20 Jun 01 Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

It is time to revive the Design Controversy, and show again that the Silly Design Institute has much more substantiation for their concept than the neo-Paleyism of the so called "intelligent" design movement.For intelligent design cannot account for all the diversity of life as we know it, and some things are just too silly to be intelligent.See Message 1 and linked papers.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : link to Message 1

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

The Sea SquirtThe sea squirt has a very simple brain which is used only to find a suitable spot to root itself for life. Once it's settled into a spot, it no longer needs the brain, so it eats itThe kakapo - the world's heaviest parrot - is not only another flightless bird but it's also nocturnal. As one Researcher simplified the situation:It was too fat to be able to fly.
It was too dumb to remember that it couldn't fly.
It would spread its wings and fall like a brickTaken from h2g2 - Weird Animals - Edited Entry

pictures fixed,Enjoy

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hi ICDESIGN, start with Message 1, then you can go to Message 4, Message 18, Message 23 and Message 33Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

RAZD, It doesn't surprise me that you came back with a Mockingbird ditty. Your some piece of work. Let me explain where I'm coming from for you. I could regurgitate and recite from the volumes and volumes of information on the human body. I could go on about the irreducible complexity of the human body and how all the complex systems of the body have to work in harmony to even exist. (all or none) I could go on about the neurological system and the brain. We could talk about how the brain can store between 100 trillion and 280 quintillion bits of information in a mere three pounds of matter. We could talk about how our body is covered with sensory receptors that are constantly sending billions of messages to the brain. We could spend lots of time on how the complexity of merely a single nerve cell challenges the evolutionary theory. (each neuron is more complicated than any present-day computer) Or how bout the fact that every cell contains an estimated one billion compounds. That's as many as 75,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, (75 sextillion) compounds per person-give or take a billion- and among these compounds are approx. five million different kinds of proteins. They all know where to go and how to get there, when to act, how fast to react, and when to stop.
We could go on and on about vision, hearing, balance, smell, taste, touch, skin, the endocrine system, the respiratory system, the gastrointestinal system, the circulatory system, the excretory system, and the musculoskeletal system. After talking about all these we would only be scratching the surface of the amazingly genius, incredibly intelligent design of the human body. If you want to believe in all the miracles that would have had to take place for all this to have fallen into perfect symmetrical place without the help of any intelligent guidance actually happened, hey, go right ahead down your little fantasy trail. But I will not entertain your platform of blasphemy and listen to you mock the design of God with your arrogant summations as if you were capable of designing a smarter, more efficient body system!
......Thanks but no thanks,
ICDESIGNEdited by ICDESIGN, : No reason given.

No miracles needed. Mutation and natural selection works just fine.Here is a link on an on-line lecture that may help explain this:

Making Genetic Networks Operate Robustly: Unintelligent Non-design Suffices, by Professor Garrett Odell

​

Abstract: Mathematical computer models of two ancient and famous genetic networks act early in embryos of many different species to determine the body plan. Models revealed these networks to be astonishingly robust, despite their 'unintelligent design.' This examines the use of mathematical models to shed light on how biological, pattern-forming gene networks operate and how thoughtless, haphazard, non-design produces networks whose robustness seems inspired, begging the question what else unintelligent non-design might be capable of.

​

Researchchannel.org

As for blasphemy, Heinlein had a good take on that:

Of all the strange "crimes" that human beings have legislated of nothing, "blasphemy" is the most amazing - with "obscenity" and "indecent exposure" fighting it out for the second and third place.

​

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

......Lets see then, I think I got it. Dumb, blind, non-thinking, non-intelligence produces intelligent design that far surpasses even the most brilliant minds in all of history. Nothing miraculous about that.
Darrhh, OK thanks Coyote!......

No, you haven't - not yet... No - dumb, blind, non-thinking, non-intelligence produces dumb, blind, non-thinking, non-intelligent design that far surpasses even the most brilliant minds in all of history.So much for brilliant minds, huh? Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

Hi ICDesign, thanks for stopping by. Which shows there is more to the Mockingbird than meets the eye. Perhaps it is a good metaphor for life in general. Maybe another mascot for the Institute. Except that it doesn't always work out that way, in fact it ONLY works out in the few individuals that survive long enough to breed or even be born. Most conceptions are miscarriages or stillborns in humans and in wild animals, because they don't always "know where to go and how to get there, when to act, how fast to react, and when to stop." Most of the failures are rather silly mistakes, like not completing step 42 before going on to step 43, while others involve steps that just don't stop at all, like cancer. And we could go on about how these systems have been assembled for funny purposes. Like the location of the entertainment center in the sewage treatment zone, or how the eating tube is also used for breathing, thus guaranteeing that some people will chock, thus causing the amusing scenes used on TV about Heimlich maneuvers and the like. Including poor vision, constant back pain problems, and debilitating genetic diseases, all part of the package ...Designed for some intelligent purpose? Or designed for humor by some cosmic imp? But I'm talking about the OTHER theory of design, and telling you that there should be equal representation for silly design in our school systems. Thousands of scientists named Steve doubt the Intelligent Design Theory, so shouldn't the Silly Design Theory be allowed in schools? So you are NOT a real ID proponent then - when the gloves come off, it's all god-this and god-that.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

If this is your idea of intelligent design, you need glasses, a hearing aid, sunburn creme, anti itch medicine etc. If this "Designer used intelligence, why do humans have poor sight, hearing, sensitive skin, and poorly designed organ structure. I would call it totally unintelligent design, and the designer either inept, stupid or has the most evil sense of humor imaginable.How can one blasphme something that does not exist?

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008