Human body design flaws

>>8782438
>Put the tube they use to breath, right next to the tube they use to swallow.

What did G*d mean by this, is he just a dick?

>>8782438
Is this real.

>>8782452
Yup.

>>8782444
Do you still get the rebellious flash when you blasphemize? I rember when it finally wore off for me the summer before highschool started. Amazingly my depression cleared up at the same time.

>>8782438
The location of the vagus nerves near the surface tissue around the sides of the neck.

The ease of access to the femoral artery and nerve.

The ease of access to the brachial plexus and brachial artery.

The ease of access to the solar, gastric and lumbar plexi.

So on and so forth, the human body really is easy to break.

>>8782438
>>8782560
Not forgetting the pterion, the weakest point in the skull, under which the middle meningeal artery runs.

In other words, from a relatively innocuous blow, epidural hematoma and likely morbidity can occur.

humans possess a nonfunctional ascorbic acid biosynthetic gene and must get ascorbic acid from their diet

>>8782502
Yeah but the anger and insecurity is still there

is it like this in all males?

>>8782961
No

yea, that's an anomaly though, it's not fair cause you can add like shit where you can piss through your navel

a real design flaw is like you cartilage not having blood vessels ergo no regeneration with no real reason behind it

File: giraffe recurrent laryngeal nerve.png (703KB, 1600x1085px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 1600x1085px

Check out the recurrent laryngeal nerve, it starts from the larynx (voice box) and goes down all the way to the aortic arch in the thorax, goes under it and then back up to the brain. A remnant from times where necks weren't really a thing yet. Looks especially hilarious in giraffes.

>>8783483
Whoa, very much an "intelligent design". ;)

>>8783483
I've come across this before listening to a debate on religion and it was used to strengthen the religious party's argument.
Fascinating how people explain biology of animals without Evolution.

>>8782438
>What did god mean
It's meant to test your Faith.

>>8783483
Don't get me wrong, God or gods may, or may not exist.

However, I don't approve of "intelligent design" as there are clear indictators of a common ancestry (outside of being created by the same being(s)).

Not to mention, often when creation myths are told or written they are normally vague and when not vague those oral traditions or written traditions have existed for hundreds, if not tens of thousands of years and would, even if they once were the word of their God or gods, be almost entirely replaced by human fabrication.

So whilst disproving "intelligent design" is possible, it doesn't disprove a God or gods, be they Christian or Hindu (who very well might be same gods acting as a single God, or vice versa).

>>8783741
>I've come across this before listening to a debate on religion and it was used to strengthen the religious party's argument
What the fuck, how would you do that?

>>8783800
Yeah sure, but what has that to do with this thread? I thought it was about making fun of intelligent design.

I couldn't care less about you being religious. But evolution is at least mostly true and intelligent design is a joke. God could have started off evolution because he would have known that humans would get created in the process since he's omniscient and all of that bullshit. Accepting the evidence for evolution doesn't make you automatically an atheist, unless your belief is directly linked to believing the bible is literally true and filled with factual descriptions of reality. Not sure why you think this is an attack against all forms of religion.

>>8783872
I pretty much said what you said, I think you misunderstood the premise?

>>8783879
No I don't understand why you brought it up in the first place. I agreed with your off-topic afterthought.

>>8783888
Ah, eitherway, I consider myself agnostic until I am presented with unassailable proof.

>>8782652
Only when tards like you make threads.

>>8783841
>What the fuck, how would you do that?
My guess is that they saw it as an argument against intelligent design so many times that they had to come up with something to say about it, rather than having to react to it defensively

>>8782438
Human bodies are weak as fuck. Literally the only thing that separates up from other "apex" predators is our intelligence and our dexterity. But it turns out that these two things (being orders of magnitude greater than anything else) are such massive advantages that we have grown to have no real competitors on earth besides each other.

>>8783908
Yeah but what was their argument?

>>8782438
>the human body is capable of producing weapons that can end all life on earth

god may have went too far in a few places

>>8783943
doesn't really matter since there is no god

there is this joke about a bunch of different kind of engineers having a drink together and talking about god. they each say how god is the same kind of engineer they are, because of something about the human body.

The punchline is when the civil engineer says "well god isn't a civil engineering. who would put the recreational facilities next to the waste treatment facilities?"

>>8783483
Darn you beat me to it. Just to add more, the bad Laryngeal nerve route goes all the back to FISH.

File: What unsure.jpg (25KB, 433x380px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 433x380px

>>8782438
Maybe I am dumb, but what is this trying to show?

>>8784447
I'm not 100% sure but I guess one of the two balls did not descend correctly

>>8782560
Plural form of Plexus is Plexūs, NOT "plexi".
Also, how the fuck is the Plexus coeliacus easy accessible? Do you even macroscopic anatomy, bruh?

>>8786053
Yeah, but the picture is wrong anyway:
the Vas deferens of the supposedly "correct" testicle shouldn't go into the Penis.

Buh the invisible man

>Into the trash it goes

>>8784447
6 and 6 are the two testicles. One of the testicles connects directly to the seminal vesicle, the other one loops around over the left ureter.

>>8786187
Is this the case in every man?

>>8786194
Yes, unless you're different.

>>8786194
OP seems to be suggesting it is a prevalent trait at the very least

Left brachiocephalic vein
Right brachiocephalic vein

Brachiocephalic artery

REEEEEEEEEE

File: 1471645097408.png (173KB, 500x758px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 500x758px

>>8786150
>So he's going to be pendantic.
>Plural form of Plexus is Plexūs, NOT "plexi".
Actually, plexi is an acceptable plural form.
>Also, how the fuck is the Plexus coeliacus easy accessible?
A moderate punch can easily affect it, as would other forms of direct assault (that seems like poor planning, if intelligent design was really a thing).
>Do you even macroscopic anatomy, bruh?
Do you?
>of Plexus
>is Plexūs
>the Plexus
>the Vas deferens
>the Penis
These are a non-standard (erroneous) use of English written grammar, on a greater magnitude than my unsual plural.

Well, I think that's anon BTFO, next time pick on someone on your lesser level.

>>8782438
Can you really call them "flaws" though? Flaws are contextual in nature, and the perpetuation of flaws through subsequent offspring implies they didn't have any significant disadvantage to the species as a whole. I guess humans are an exception though, because technology has allowed them to live despite some obvious genetic disadvantages.

Don't tell /pol/, but white skin color seems like a flaw in human design. Considering most animals thrive in warmer climates and therefore are exposed to more severe UV radiation, white skin color seems counterproductive.

Also, humans are also vulnerable to traumatic brain injury. I think the lack of a better safeguard is definitely a flaw.

Apart from essential organs, the neck is the most important part of the body.

- It is completely unprotected
- It has very weak muscles compared to the object it must support
- It is packed very tightly with important things, making any injury to the neck very impactful and very hard to repair through surgery

>>8786239
So your argument is that because something different didn't develop, what did develop was the best possibility?

>>8786248
No. I'm trying to argue that what has developed is the best possibility. In a competitive situation such as natural selection, a ubiquitously expressed phenotype on a species which thrives cannot be a flaw unless it confers a significant disadvantage. Using hypothetical situations where species 'X' now has protection on its neck from lacerations is pointless if this species is of least concern. So many variables shape the development of a successful organism, so interchanging phenotypes on a highly successful one isn't necessarily an improvement, it's just speculation.

>all these armchair gods thinking they could create a better human

y'all are brainlets

>>8786222
You burgers raelly are something special...
>acceptable plural form
Says who? Just because you burgers are too lazy to use proper Latin, it doesn't mean you're right.

Also, do you know something called Terminologia Anatomica (1998)?
The official Latin name of all the entities/objects I wrote starts with a capital letter.
Not only is my use of capitalization correct, it also makes you an ignorant burger for not knowing how thing are properly named.

>moderate punch can easily affect it [Plexus coelicaus]
No? It fucks up your Diaphragma for a couple of second and therefore your respiration.
That Plexus is ventral to the Pars abdominalis aortae, so how can a moderate punch reach it?

>BTFO
Next time pick some other ignorant burger on your side of the ocean if you want to BTFO someone.
>>8786404
This.

>>8782438
I don't know, but it'd be nice if we could fix those flaws or prevent them from being exploited by pathogens.

God made us perfect not ideal so it's not blasphemy to ponder "better" configurations of the human body.

>>8783921
human bodies can be surprisingly strong and resilient if they get used everyday.

you literally can't look at a human body from after agriculture began and use that for your argument that humans suck physically.

>>8782438
>>8782444
Where else would you put it?