People who don't believe in God. Darwin or God?
29 comments
Does anybody else suspect that instead of forming a logical argument, these guys just go around pointing out one portion of the anatomy and claiming that it can't have evolved?
What were Adam and Eve's umbilical cords attached to?
"People who don't believe in God. Darwin or God?"
Is this supposed to convey some sort of thought?
"I see that they are not only uneducated but mean messy people."
Uneducated. Us? Ha!
"The navel cord is attached to a person."
That would be an umbilical cord, oh so educated one.
"Lets put 1+1 together how can you get something that evolved out of something that had to be attached to another person."
The umbilical cord is a byproduct of mammalian reproduction. It didn't necessarily "evolve" so much as happens because it has to.
"Do you get it now."
I'm still working on that first bit up top.
"A navel cord could not had evolved it needs to be attached to something."
Go take an embryology course.
"So Darwin or God you smart people. Act your age out and not your history."
I'm hoping like hell that English isn't your first language.
Since evolution doesn't work that way, your question is really stupid. To begin with, get basic knowledge of biology instead of calling people uneducated. Umbilical cords re not living beings. Therefore, the theory doesn't apply to them.
It evolved from the fetus' attachment to the egg yolk. Placental mammals lost the actual yolk, but the umbilical cord still feeds nutrients to the fetus from the mother's body.
The umbilical cord is existent in oviparous creatures, as well. We just got rid of the egg shell when we became viviparous, and attached the umbilical directly to the mother.
Bored one-time poster wroteWhat were Adam and Eve's umbilical cords attached to?
This leads us back to 'Did Adam have a navel?'
If yes, then God is a liar because he created evidence of Adam's gestation that never happened.
If not, then how are we made in God's image? We have navels so that means God must have one too. God was born of a mother? Why not worship her instead?
Thanks, Falconer. As stupid as this person is, it is the best attempt at using the "irreducible complexity" argument that I have heard in a while, and it made me wonder where the umbilical cord originated.
An umbilical cord is found in all placental mammals. There is an evolutionary advantage to pregnancy over a clutch of eggs in that the mother carries the fetus, rather than leaving it to chance that something might eat the eggs (Yum!). A disadvantage is pregnancy and birth are more difficult, leaving the possibility the mother may die during either, miscarry or have a stillborn. The plusses must outweigh the minusses, as that's the way most mammals do it.
Navel cord? I suppose this illiterate dweeb is referring to the umbilical cord -- you know, what got wrapped around his neck at birth, temporarily depriving him of oxygen and resulting in permanent brain damage.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
