"Nature appears to be an avid abortionist" - LOL

[ChairOne]

So from the ID perspective, what does that say about our creator?

"But if we can't infer anything about the design from the designer, maybe we can go the other way. What can we tell about the designer from the design? While there is much that is marvelous in nature, there is also much that is flawed, sloppy and downright bizarre. Some nonfunctional oddities, like the peacock's tail or the human male's nipples, might be attributed to a sense of whimsy on the part of the designer. Others just seem grossly inefficient. In mammals, for instance, the recurrent laryngeal nerve does not go directly from the cranium to the larynx, the way any competent engineer would have arranged it. Instead, it extends down the neck to the chest, loops around a lung ligament and then runs back up the neck to the larynx. In a giraffe, that means a 20-foot length of nerve where 1 foot would have done. If this is evidence of design, it would seem to be of the unintelligent variety."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/magazine/20WWLN.html?pagewanted=2

Decent little article - some flaws, but decent on the whole.

[Lindacooks]

1. That's a good article, with some excellent points.

[DemBones DemBones]

2. The thing about Nature as abortionist is that Nature

aborts primarily defective embryos, rarely healthy ones.

[ChairOne]

3. Link or reference that says *exactly* that plz? /eom