Holy Cow - Creationism and Men's Nipples.....

[MsTryska]

when wingnuts say that Creationism is a valid theory that should be taught in schools, are they including the story of Adam and Eve?


if so, considering fetal development, the theory doesn't hold any water at all.


primarily because fetuses develop female first, and then turn into males, when the XY chromosome starts exerting testosterone.


this is why men have nipples, and rudimentary breast tissue.


so unless they plan on switching things, and saying that Eve was the first human, or perhaps having soem sort of elaborate original sin reason for why all humans are formed female first, Creationism isn't a theory.


if the nipples exist, you must acquit.

[fob]

1. Recommending for Greatest for Summary line alone!

[MsTryska]

32. baha - so that's the trick for getting nominated.....

from now on, every thread i start will contain the the word "nipples". :D


thanks for the nomination!

[tallahasseedem]

2. Thank you,

for your sensible argument. Nominated.

[MsTryska]

33. your welcome.

thank you for the nomination!

[jojo54]

3. There's also the thing about Adam's rib.....

that one of Adam's ribs were used to create Eve, resulting in men having one less rib. Well, scientists have put that theory to rest quite effectively. Great thread.

Voting.

[southernleftylady]

24. OK sounding ignorant here ... do we have the same about of ribs?

:hide:

[Kraklen]

25. Yup.

Although if you look at old school science texts they'll say something else.

[Orangepeel]

31. see, God created Adam with an EXTRA rib because he planned to remove it

:silly:

[MsTryska]

34. You just can't argue with autopsies...

thanks for the nomination!

[batsauce]

50. I always kindof wondered

why people kept saying that, when it was so easy just to actually count the number of ribs.

Apparently it is easier to just repeat things, than to to investigate the underlying principles themselves.

I have to say, much of the debate over evolution is largely people just repeating things.

[Ganja Ninja]

4. Mens nipples, like dinosaur fossils were put here by God to ...

test your unquestioning faith in the creation. You flunked!

[XOKCowboy]

12. LOL Bill Hicks Best Line

Bill will live forever in the hearts of progressives!

[slybacon9]

44. A trickster God!

...burying dinosaur bones in the night to test people's faith...
-bill hicks

(honorary DUer and funniest human to ever walk, god rest his soul)

[Terran]

18. Your right, and there's no use arguing about it.

"People of Faith" can and will always come up with a reason why you're facts are wrong and their faith is right (present Company of Faith excluded, of course).

[mondo joe]

5. Photographic proof of evolution right here.

[mondo joe]

19. By the way, this also proves that God steered evolution and he is gay.

That's my take on it.

[XemaSab]

26. Thanks

My faith in the beauty of evolution is re-affirmed.

[MsTryska]

35. Now those are some serious nips....

thanks for the eye candy!

[mondo joe]

36. This evidence is promoted in the spirit of pure science!

Shame on you!

[MsTryska]

38. doh! sorry.....

I mean...what an excellent specimen of purely scientific manflesh.

[mondo joe]

42. I am building an impressive collection of such scientific documents.

Miaow!

[lildreamer316]

39. Wow what a distraction....meow.n/t

[girl gone mad]

40. Also a compelling argument for cloning. n/t

[Kraklen]

6. This works only under the assumption...

that Creationists care about facts and logic.

Ergo, it doesn't work.

[EVDebs]

7. What baffles me are those e. coli bacteria that we depend upon for

digestion. How do they explain this ? God allowed this, but the 'devil is in the details'. BTW, I'm a 'born again' Christian and see no problem with evolution and God.

[mondo joe]

8. Moreover: Tapeworm and other parasites.

What's up with Gud creating tapeworms to live in the bodies of hungry children?

[EVDebs]

9. Don't know about parasites but we couldn't live w/o those stomach bacteria

[Kraklen]

20. Standard symbiotic relationship.

Interesting, but hardly unusual.

[EVDebs]

22. So, the bacteria had to be created first.

[Kraklen]

23. E. coli have been around longer than humans...

if that's what you mean by being "created first."

I have no idea whether or not E. coli evolved from an earlier ancestor in the gut of a human ancestor, if that's what you're getting at.

[batsauce]

47. the Christian answer

would be sin.

Adam sinned against God, and as a result, his descendants suffer the consequences. There is fix for all of this, but it is kind of theological in nature.

You'd think that a species like Homo Sapiens, which has been around for a while would evolve out of the whole tapeworm situation. Why haven't we?

[thereismore]

10. fetuses do not develop female first.

What kind of a nonsense is that? The male fetus has the XY chromosomes from the very beginning, therefore it is never a female. There are things happening from the very start at the biomolecular level (DNA, RNA, proteins) that are unique to a male or female fetus, whatever the case is. Saying it first develops as a female is nothing but insufficient knowledge on your biology professor's part. Maybe the fetuses look alike. But at a molecular level, they are different at all times.

Do you know that 40 years ago, thymus was a "vestigial" organ? Please.

[Kraklen]

15. I think you know what he means...

male and female fetal genitalia are essentially undifferentiated until expression of various genes on the Y chromosome. That's why men have nipples. If something goes wrong with that expression, you end up with a male child with a vagina and ovaries.

[mondo joe]

16. Depends on how you choose to define male and female

The female form is the default, and in some cases even with the XY genetics the hormonal switches are never flipped and the child has the appearance of being female, though they are genetically male.

[MsTryska]

28. Umm.....actually it does first develop as a female....

nipples, breast tissue, clitoris......when XY exerts testosterone (by way of brand spanking news testicles, a fetus starts masculinizing:

here's a more scientific explanation:

"Initially, all human fetuses are female, in that the default pathway is to develop into a female. During the eighth week of gestation, the presence of a Y chromosome and a functional locus for the SRY gene product, also called the testes determining factor (TDF), determines if testicular development will occur. This process converts the inherently female fetus into a male one, as a steadily increasing surge of testosterone is then produced by the testes. Much of the testosterone is converted to dihydrotestosterone, which is the key hormone to virilize the fetus. Along the biochemical pathway, other recently identified gene products likely play an additional role in the masculinization of the fetus.

Further progression toward the eventual male phenotype occurs as antimüllerian hormone is produced, inhibiting the formation of müllerian ducts, which would lead to female genital development. The fetal brain is also affected by this process. The corpus callosum, amygdala, cerebellum, and portions of the preoptic area of the hypothalamus are larger in brains exposed to testosterone. Corresponding parts of the brain are smaller in female, or testosterone-deprived, fetuses. Indeed, in the absence of testosterone, the fetus continues its progression in the female state. Development of the ovaries and the female genital tract is likely triggered by follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), which is present in both male and female fetuses, but whose effect is masked by the testosterone surge in males. "


from this link - http://www.emedicine.com/PED/topic2789.htm


another interesting fetal factoid - the first thing fetuses develop is a rectum.

in otherwords we all start out as assholes, and evolve from there. :p

[thereismore]

41. Some people forever remain assholes and die as assholes too.

I didn't mean you of course!

[MsTryska]

43. *lol* well....

we can't all evolve at the same pace.

no offense taken!

[CatholicEdHead]

46. Intresting

Does the women's lib movement know about this?

[burrowowl]

48. And birds

start out as males, primitive like creeationists!

[batsauce]

49. Am I reading this correctly...

The first paragraph seems to be describing an undifferentiated fetus.

It is only after the the antimullerian hormone is introduced that you get either masculine or female differentiation. In other words, at some point in fetal development, there is a fork in the road. Given antimullerian hormone and other factors, the fetus ends up masculine.
Without those factors, the fetus defaults to female.

The author does say:
"default pathway is to develop into a female. "
He does not seem to be saying that female characteristics exist and then become male characteristics.

I think nipples are a bad example. Since both males and females have them, how can they be identified as either a male or female characteristic?

[thereismore]

51. Good points. Good questions. I think it's fair

to say that a fetus is a "it" before a decision is made to go either way.

[MsTryska]

53. I don't think it's that bad of a example....

nipples exist to feed young. males develop nipples as do females do, males also develop rudimentary breast tissue - therefore enabling them to lactate under extreme circumstances.

it is only after the antimullerian hormone is introduced that sexual organs differentiate. In order to flip the switch from female fetus to male fetus in the first place - XY needs to exert on the testicular gene. Then the testicular gene exerts antimullerian hormone, causing penis and testes to grow (from what would be clitoral tissue) clitoris grows into penile shaft, clitoral hood becomes the foreskin. it's really interesting.


here's an even freakier gender issue. Ranchers can tell you about fraternal twin calves - when you have a male and female twin, sometimes the male fetuses testosterone will exert on the female twin, and altho she may be biologically female, in her head she's male - and when she's matured she will try to mount other females, as if she were a bull. Theses females are called Freemartins.

[n2doc]

11. can't argue faith

They would just say "Man was made in God's image", thus, because God has nipples we do too. No thought required

[thereismore]

14. A little known fact about male nipples:

I will let you look up evidence for yourselves. Male nipples can be used for nursing children. There have been documented cases. Maybe men have them as backup in case the woman/mother of a child dies. In which case they can be made to lactate by stimulation. Don't flame me, look it up.

[MsTryska]

30. I actually just heard this....

it spurred this post. :D

pretty freaky, huh?

[minerva50]

37. I've read of that, also I know an adoptive mother

who had never been pregnant and started lactating when she brought the new baby home.

[Maraya1969]

13. There is also the vestigial organs argument

How does one explain that we have organs that we don't need, like the Appendix and Wisdom teeth? Did God put them their just for a joke?

[dummy-du1]

21. It's a defense against plagiarism

I think god stole the human design from another god, and this god put some useless organs in the body to find out, if someone infringes his copyright. Sort of like the Russians did, when they copied Western rocket designs inclusive some screws, that didn't have a real function.

Well, the intelligent designer doesn't seem too intelligent...

[Ganja Ninja]

27. Yes and how about Krusty the Clown's superfluous third nipple?

Is God a writer of the Simpson's?

[depakid]

29. What about our tails?

Yes, we do have vestigial tails (the coccyx).

But see: The Missouri Association for Creation's "arguments. LOL!

http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro07.html

(The creationist's have thoroughly google bombed searches like "coccyx" and "vestigial tail." It would actually be funny if they weren't controlling pretty much every branch of the federal government and most of the Southern and Midwestern states).

[thereismore]

52. I don't have a tail and neither do you.

We have muscles attached to those last vertebrae that make us able to stand up, walk, and hold our poop. Monkeys are built differently - they have a tail, which does not have these functions. It has other functions. So, we don't have tails. Sorry.

[Maraya1969]

54. I think Chimpanzees are 99.8% or 98.9% the same as humans

as far as our DNA.

Here is a picture of the coccus. I wonder if there are examples of people having theirs removed and how they walk without one. That would end the discussion.

[thereismore]

55. No, chimps and human are only 95% same, and that's a huge

difference. I can give you recent scientific articles that document it, if you want.

As far as the muscles on the "tail bone", they are there. I don't know anyone who had these bones removed.

[Maraya1969]

57. The case is still out on genetic differences between apes and man

Most of what I found on a quick GOOGLD search suggests 99% though.

THACA, N.Y. -- Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor, and even today 99 percent of the two species' DNA is identical. But since the paths of man and chimp diverged 5 million years ago, that one percent of genetic difference appears to have changed humans in an unexpected way: It could have made people more prone to cancer.
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/May05/chimps.kr.html

When one looks at the chromosomes of humans and the living great apes (orangutan, gorilla, and chimpanzee), it is immediately apparent that there is a great deal of similarity between the number and overall appearance of the chromosomes across the four different species. Yes, there are differences (and I will be addressing these), but the overall similarity is striking.
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html

What It Really Means To Be 99% Chimpanzee
Jonathan Marks
Department of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/interests/aaa/marksaaa99.htm

This study which is not finished says there is a difference of 15%.

http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/interests/aaa/marksaaa99.htm


This is interesting although I don't know how this person came to this conclusion. And it is from 1923.

[yurbud]

17. God wanted men to have a secondary erogenous zone

and potential piercing location.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[slybacon9]

45. God left them there

in case you wanted to get the adaptors later on...

...proof switching teams is natural!

[Maestro]

56. The last line would be great for a DU T-shirt

How about "Which do you believe, walking apes or talking snakes?"