14 1

Intelligent design vs idiotic design

We all know the arguments for intelligent design the complexity of the (inside out, back to front) eye (which has a blind spot) but I want to hear your thoughts on what went wrong in this design. Like, that spot in the middle of your back that only a contortionist can scratch.

Disclaimer : I am in no way suggesting animal life or the universe is designed, but thought it would be a laugh to see your thoughts on what went wrong if there was a designer.

Dav87 6 Jan 22

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


I'm unaware of any science saying there is something "wrong" with our design. 😉

In fact, there is a name for people that think the design of their human body is wrong: body dysmorphic disorder.


Any designer who respects itself would have at least try to create something superior to the original product. If God were real and created the man to his image I think he sucks as a Designer.


Why did God put a playground next to a waste disposal system?....Ooh intelligent design.


idiotic design can be the characteristics of a creature that inherently destroys its own environment ,which will then lead to its own demise .This would be the idiotic design of the human brain



  1. Our eyes are amazing, but fairly exposed. One tiny speck of dirt causes maddening effects. 2.Wisdom teeth. Why have them if there isn't room? I'm thinking it is part of evolution and eventually they will disappear. 3.Also, we get sick so easily. That really puts a damper on life. 4. Excruciating pain during childbirth. But many believers don't support birth control. 5. Tsunamis, floods, earthquakes, lightening, Arizona heat...

There's intelligence "IN" the design, but the design is not necessarily intelligent.


Why put the leisure centre in the middle of the sewage works?


Humans have like 2 dozen vestigial muscles, bones, and organs. It would be like designing a modern car with such things as non-functioning oil lamps, ski runners, and a steam engine. What was the designer thinking? 😉


The human brain. High Intelligence in humans and the technology that has been created due to it ,causes an unrelenting disruptive effect on the ecology of all plant and animal life on this planet which will inevitably lead to its own extinction. This is the reason I do not believe in a God.Any thing that would create something with these capabilities is either incompetent or just doesn't give a shit

Good logical answer


What's up with sinuses? Why do I need these gaps in my head that seem to serve no purpose but to produce goo when I am sick?


Pharyngeal nerve
Nipples on men
Small toes
Funny bone(ulnar nerve)
To name a few

Please correct these designer. None of them make sense.


If you establish the argument for God on the basis of complexity of design, then the existential foundation of God is based on how you define or judge "complexity." First of all, complexity is purely subjective from a human perspective. How often has something that you thought was complex seemed simple a few years later after you got some education on the subject. Secondly, there is a reverse atheistic insinuation to this argument. If God only exists due to complexity, then if design were perceived as simple, then were would be no viable argument for God's existence. So, at what point on the continuum of simplicity/complexity does God therefore exist, and at what point does God become superfluous. This is an unanswerable question because no such line can be "intelligently" drawn. Thirdly, when this argument is made the example used is often something like a watch, which is a human design, not a divine design, and therefore a false analogy The example of a tree or a mountain is never used because it is realized that it is not convincing to say to a non-believer, "Of course God exists, just look at that tree." However, arguing from human design is not only a false analogy but is anthropomorphically making God in the image of mankind, rather than mankind in the image of God, which used to be considered blasphemy per the Bible. Fourthly, even if one does concede that the existential design of a tree does imply a creative force, that is ALL that it implies, and that creative force need not be anything other than Nature itself, certainly not Jehovah/Yaweh, or any other personal God of one's choosing. So, unless one wants to concede also that Nature is synonymous with God, then one hasn't really said anything intelligible.



Tender genitalia should be located in a safer place, inside plenty of padding to avoid injury, instead of being exposed in a place that's easy to kick.


an incomplete set of french curves led to many "defects". In addition to that inaccessible back acre some endure, there's also plate techtonics, algebra and the oboe.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:17530
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.