A world with a loving God.

[billvon]

That is not the same as “Absolutely. He is still 100% human. To use Jan's terminology, his "body suit" is incomplete, but his mind (what wears the suit) is not.”

Of course; no equality was claimed. I just pointed out that you are lying again.

Since you forget anything you said that doesn't support your religious agenda, here is the thread:

Halc: A human without an arm is damaged, but still human.
Billvon: Absolutely. He is still 100% human. To use Jan's terminology, his "body suit" is incomplete, but his mind (what wears the suit) is not.
Jan: That’s not my terminology dude.
Jan (from a few days back): "These body suits are perfectly complete in their design."

You brought up "body suit" as a way to separate the mind from the body. The mind is what makes us human; the body suit is just the meat that supports the mind. It's a reasonably good term.

The possibility of bodily defects is part of the design.

Absolutely. The design flaws cause defects.

No they’re not. They are due to other factors, that is perfectly accepted as part and parcel of the human condition.

Given that we spend billions of dollars trying to fix those flaws - they are absolutely NOT accepted. At best we live with them when we can't fix them.

With read regard to the poor iPhone analogy. That would be a design flaw, because they are not designed to spontaneously combust.

And women were not designed to pee their pants every time they laugh. Children were not designed to choke on food and die. Adults were not designed for their backs to fail. Those are design flaws too.

If we evolved, there could be a possibility of a perfect body, just as much as there could possibly be an imperfect one. This would mean there is the possibility of someone living forever.

Nope. Evolution does not produce perfection; it produces what works (barely.) Which is what we have now. And in fact it will never, ever produce someone that lives forever - because as soon as any organism lives forever (or even comes close) evolution slows and stops.

we find bodily defects are inevitable . . .

Yes. So are wars, and terrorism, and rape, and slavery. Those are part of "the human condition" brought about by our flaws - our angers and our lusts and our greed. They have been with us forever and will be with us forever. But just because they exist does not mean they are accepted.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Doesn't "perfectly complete" mean "completely free of defects"?

No.

Are you merely saying that it works well enough to allow humans to operate as such?

It couldn’t work any better.
Just because we desire a non human body doesn’t mean our desires would be in our best interest.

Some defects are built in to every human being. A list was given earlier. So it's hardly just a "possibility".

We don’t all suffer every illness, or inability going. So there is a possibility you could slip accidentally and break your arm, and there’s the possibility you could never experience a broken arm. So possibility is there.

You were given a list of imperfections.

So what. Nothing in that list renders you non human. In fact the desire to be perfect is a trait that humans have, if they want to. Another signature of the Almighty God you don’t accept. Perhaps!

Any designer worth his salt can see immediate room for improvement in the "design" of the human being.

No they can’t.
They only think they can.

Of course, this isn't a surprise once you understand that human beings evolved rather than being designed by a Perfect Designer.

That’s fine.
You believe what you want.

 

[James R]

It couldn’t work any better.

Yes it could, as has been carefully explained to you several times by several different people.

This the point where I stop feeding the troll.

 

[(Q)]

We don’t all suffer every illness, or inability going. So there is a possibility you could slip accidentally and break your arm, and there’s the possibility you could never experience a broken arm. So possibility is there.

Without getting personal, all I can ask about that is if you have had any issues with your health or body which have been pointed out here as flaws in the design? If so, how has your doctor explained it? If your doctor has explained it as a common problem with the human body due to evolutionary changes, would you accept that?

 

[James R]

(Q):

Jan doesn't believe in evolution.

 

[(Q)]

Yeah, but I wonder if Jan would reject his own trusted family doctors explanations. I'd like to be the proverbial fly on the wall with that one.

 

[foghorn]

When God was thinking of a mode of transport for one of his best life forms(bacteria), he came up with plants and animals among many other ways.

 

[Jan Ardena]

You brought up "body suit" as a way to separate the mind from the body. The mind is what makes us human; the body suit is just the meat that supports the mind. It's a reasonably good term.

You may believe it’s reasonably good, but it’s not my terminology.

Absolutely. The design flaws cause defects.

You’re entitled to your opinion and wishful thinking.

Given that we spend billions of dollars trying to fix those flaws - they are absolutely NOT accepted. At best we live with them when we can't fix them.

There’s nothing wrong with trying to fix ailments, and physical injuries. And there’s nothing wrong with trying attain perfection. That is all part and parcel of human beings. From individuals to financed organisation.

And women were not designed to pee their pants every time they laugh.

They’re able to do it either by choice, or accidentally. Yes they were.

Children were not designed to choke on food and die.

Here he goes with the “children”. Bringing in the big guns.
The Eeeeeemotionss!
Accidents happen.
Finish this for me... “to err is...”

Adults were not designed for their backs to fail. Those are design flaws too.

Err...Yes they were!

Nope. Evolution does not produce perfection; it produces what works (barely.) Which is what we have now.

Which is what human beings have always had.
At what point in time will nature produce a wishful thinking type of perfect human being.
What is your understanding of a flawless human being, and where did you get that understanding?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Without getting personal, all I can ask about that is if you have had any issues with your health or body which have been pointed out here as flaws in the design? If so, how has your doctor explained it? If your doctor has explained it as a common problem with the human body due to evolutionary changes, would you accept that?

Firstly, there’s no need to get personal. We’re just having a chat.
Secondly I have ailments like every other human being. My doctor tells me what it is. At no time does he start crying about “imperfect design”. Plus there’s no need to bring up evolutionary changes as it makes no difference to the human being.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Yeah, but I wonder if Jan would reject his own trusted family doctors explanations. I'd like to be the proverbial fly on the wall with that one.

Explanation of what?

 

[(Q)]

Firstly, there’s no need to get personal. We’re just having a chat.
Secondly I have ailments like every other human being. My doctor tells me what it is. At no time does he start crying about “imperfect design”. Plus there’s no need to bring up evolutionary changes as it makes no difference to the human being.

As I mentioned, I wasn't trying to get personal and was only interested in whether or not you had any of the issues and if you accepted what your doctor told you about them if the doctor was explaining the issues in evolutionary terms. I didn't need to know the issues, that's personal for you.

Explanation of what?

The explanation of the issue, for example if it were a lower back problem, the doctor would impart that the human body was not meant to be in an upright position.

 

[billvon]

You may believe it’s reasonably good, but it’s not my terminology.

They are literally your words.

You’re entitled to your opinion and wishful thinking.

One that you share.

Will you deny that, or do I have to go back once again and show you your own words?

There’s nothing wrong with trying to fix ailments, and physical injuries.

That is exactly right. No one accepts the defects as "that's what God wanted." They try to mitigate the problems those defects caused (for example, through insulin.)

They’re able to do it either by choice, or accidentally. Yes they were.

Ah, so women were designed to have their pelvic floors damaged by childbirth such that they become incontinent.

Here he goes with the “children”.

Can't answer that one without some serious cognitive dissonance, can you?

At what point in time will nature produce a wishful thinking type of perfect human being.

Never . Evolution doesn't work like that.

What is your understanding of a flawless human being, and where did you get that understanding?

There will never be one - but we can get much closer than the faulty collection of parts we have now. I can think of five "simple" changes we could make right now that would improve human beings. (Simple is in quotes because there is nothing simple about changing a genome.)

 

[Jan Ardena]

As I mentioned, I wasn't trying to get personal and was only interested in whether or not you had any of the issues and if you accepted what your doctor told you about them if the doctor was explaining the issues in evolutionary terms. I didn't need to know the issues, that's personal for you.

Okay.

The explanation of the issue, for example if it were a lower back problem, the doctor would impart that the human body was not meant to be in an upright position.

That would be his opinion.
As far as anyone can see, humans walk upright, unless they are unable.

 

[Jan Ardena]

They are literally your words.

You are seriously delusional if you believe that

One that you share.

Will you deny that, or do I have to go back once again and show you your own words?

Do what you like.
You lost this debate ages ago.
You’re now in twitch mode, before you finally stop moving.

Ah, so women were designed to have their pelvic floors damaged by childbirth such that they become incontinent.

They weren’t designed for that, but if it happens then their body can go there.

Can't answer that one without some serious cognitive dissonance, can you?

It’s funny how some people Eventually always use children, in terrible situations to win hearts and minds. I think it’s pathetic.

There will never be one - but we can get much closer than the faulty collection of parts we have now. I can think of five "simple" changes we could make right now that would improve human beings. (Simple is in quotes because there is nothing simple about changing a genome.)

So can I.
I’m sure every single thinking human being in the world has a wish list. But it doesn’t alter the fact. We are human beings. To be a human being, you have to be complete.

 

[(Q)]

Okay.

That would be his opinion.
As far as anyone can see, humans walk upright, unless they are unable.

What scientists "can see" is that humans did not always walk upright and know that back pain and other skeletal problems are relatively common in modern humans, that they are an unfortunate side effect of walking upright. Distributing all our weight on just two limbs can have painful consequences, like lower back pain, slipped disks, arthritis in hips and knees, and collapsed foot arches.

 

[spidergoat]

It couldn’t work any better.

Some people and animals are born with horrendous genetic defects.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Some people and animals are born with horrendous genetic defects.

I know.

 

[Jan Ardena]

What scientists "can see" is that humans did not always walk upright and know that back pain and other skeletal problems are relatively common in modern humans, that they are an unfortunate side effect of walking upright. Distributing all our weight on just two limbs can have painful consequences, like lower back pain, slipped disks, arthritis in hips and knees, and collapsed foot arches.

Not all scientists see it that way.
Some scientists see the problems stemming from things like a lack of exercise, putting pressure on the spine through sitting in a slump posture, smoking, obesity, and stuff like that. I think that’s a more simpler, and most likely explanation.
It may be a healthier approach as well, in terms of treatments, and management.

 

[davewhite04]

What scientists "can see" is that humans did not always walk upright and know that back pain and other skeletal problems are relatively common in modern humans, that they are an unfortunate side effect of walking upright. Distributing all our weight on just two limbs can have painful consequences, like lower back pain, slipped disks, arthritis in hips and knees, and collapsed foot arches.

100% agree. We should of stayed in the trees.

 

[(Q)]

Not all scientists see it that way.

Yes, apparently about 3% of scientists don't see it that way.

Some scientists see the problems stemming from things like a lack of exercise, putting pressure on the spine through sitting in a slump posture, smoking, obesity, and stuff like that. I think that’s a more simpler, and most likely explanation.

Except for the fact that many people who exercise, aren't obese and don't sit in a slump position still have those same problems. How do those 3% explain that?