You must log in or # to comment.
Also, Appendicitis is when your Appendix, a vestigial organ which produces small amounts of Vitamin C, randomly explodes and kills you.
Someone recently pointed out the bottom left one is because we can see color better with our eye design.
Are the other ones still valid?
It might be intelligent design but not perfect design. I mean we build stuff with flaws too and consider ourselves intelligent.
I mean if God or some space alien was really good with biotech and had these parts laying around the result is pretty good. Most humans function for several decades before stuff breaks. The earth is also a pretty stable ecosystem.
Both much better than we could build.
The Christian religion regards God as infallible. So if his designs aren’t perfect either we weren’t designed by him or he isn’t infallible, which breaks Christian doctrine.
Christian doctrine breaks Christian doctrine
Also, anyone believing in goat herder fairytales from the year 0 should not be allowed to raise children as you don’t have the intellectual capacity to do so
I also subscribe to this ideology. If there is a god, he was never on our side.
He might be infallible, maybe just sadist. You know… Mysterious way and other stuff when one runs out of arguments
No, it is not intelligent design.
Please stop as I’m unsure if you’re joking or not and my patience with idiots is gone.
And amazingly 7 billion of us still breathing and at least half of us think they can better 😂
Perfect, mustve been made by an omnipotent being.
This D&D alignment chart is weird…
Yeah, I don’t think I’d put wisdom teeth in lawful good personally.
Where is Doctor Pangloss when you need him?
Bro myopia is the least stupid part of our eye design problems. Our retinas are built entirely backwards for no other reason besides evolution making a mistake and then duct taping over it too much to fix it later.
If your retina was the right way around (like cephalopod eyes) you would have:
- No blind spots
- Higher fidelity vision even with the same number of receptors since the nerves and blood vessels wouldn’t interfere like they do now
- much lower likelihood of retinal detachment since you could attach it for real in the first place
- possibility for better brightness/darkness resolution since blood supply could be greater without affecting light passage
- possibility for better resolution because ganglion nerves can be packed more densely without affecting light passage
- The ability to regenerate cones and rods because you could, again, ACTUALLY HAVE SUPPORT CELLS WITHOUT BLOCKING LIGHT TO THE RETINA
Our eyes are built in the stupidest way possible.
Another fun fact: retinol is regenerated by your liver. Not your eyes, not some part of your brain, not some organ near your head like your thalamus which could probably get the job done if it tried, your fucking liver. Your eyes taking a while to adjust to the dark has basically nothing to do with your eyes; it’s because of the delay in adjustment by your fucking liver to produce more retinal, dump it into your vascular system and wait for it to hopefully reach your eyes. Why are we built like this?!
Edit: A few comments asked for sources on the relation between dark adaptation and liver vitamin A. So I went looking for sources. It was honestly somewhat difficult to find information, but I was able to find two different case studies showing that night blindness in patients with damaged livers. Specifically these individuals had liver damage that affected their serum Vitamin A levels. And after raising their vitamin A levels, their symptoms improved.
This study details a patient with normal day vision and no other ocular problems besides being unable to see at night.
The patient had a medical history of stage 4 non-alcoholic liver cirrhosis, which led to a malabsorption of vitamin A, as confirmed by the very low vitamin A level in the serum analysis… …Subjective improvement in symptoms, along with better performance on visual field, were noted after initiating oral vitamin A supplementation for 6 months.
This study details a patient with night blindness caused by low levels of vitamin A presumably due to Hepatitis C.
Case description: This case describes a 64-year-old female patient with symptomatic VAD, likely secondary to liver cirrhosis in the setting of Hepatitis C. The patient presented with night blindness and blurry vision. She was successfully managed with direct replacement of Vita-min A.
These studies do show that dark adaptation is dependent on vitamin A produced by the liver, but I’ll be the first to admit it’s not exactly conclusive evidence of my initial claim that the liver must respond to dark conditions increasing retinol concentration in the blood in order for rod cells to function properly in low light conditions. That is a possible explanation for these case studies but not necessarily the only one, so take my last fun fact with a grain of salt.
Another fun fact: retinol is regenerated by your liver. Not your eyes, not some part of your brain, not some organ near your head like your thalamus which could probably get the job done if it tried, your fucking liver. Your eyes taking a while to adjust to the dark has basically nothing to do with your eyes; it’s because of the delay in adjustment by your fucking liver to produce more retinal, dump it into your vascular system and wait for it to hopefully reach your eyes.
This is fascinating, I had no idea that there was another mechanism at play to improve low light vision other than pupil dilation
Or that it got stuck in the figurative basement organ where a silly amount of bio-chemistry is stuck because evolution kinda shrugged a few million years ago.
Just one more reaction, bro, I promise, I’m not just making up new organic compounds for fun.
Source that retinal concentration is related to dark adaptation?
I was able to find two case studies showing direct links from vitamin A levels (and liver damage) to night blindness. I’ve edited my initial comment with the links to them.
I’m not OP and I’m not an expert, but I know that the production of rhodopsin requires retinal. Rhodopsin is a light-sensitive protein our eyes use to see in low-light conditions, and is essential for our night vision. Retinal and retinol are not the same thing, but they both come from Vitamin A, and convert into each other during the visual cycle. Which means that a deficiency in Vitamin A = a deficiency in retinol, retinal, and rhodopsin, which in effect leads to night blindness.
But I’d like to know more/get a source for OP’s liver connection. I know most of our retinol is stored in the liver. However, I’m having difficulty verifying their claim that the delay in night vision onset is due to it traveling from the liver to the eyes. From what I can find, the retinol ligand that produces rhodopsin already exists in mammalian eyes (and persists there as part of the aforementioned visual cycle.) So the argument that night vision takes so long because retinol needs to transfer from the liver to the eyes is suspect.
Unfortunately, search engines absolutely suck these days, and almost every article I can find is behind a fucking paywall. So I’m struggling to find information that can either confirm or deny OP’s claim.
OP, please provide a source! Inquiring minds want to know more!
Honestly, it was pretty hard for me to find a source which has made me a little skeptical of my own statements.
I was able to find two case studies in which patients with liver damage that caused them to have low levels of vitamin A exhibited night blindness. Both were treated for vitamin A deficiency and saw symptoms improve.
The strongest evidence of my original claim is the fact that one of the patients had otherwise healthy eyes and vision, only having extreme trouble seeing at night. After receiving treatment for vitamin A deficiency, her night vision improved. This suggests that dark adaptation is dependent on vitamin A in the blood which is regulated by the liver.
However, I’m now somewhat skeptical and curious myself considering these two studies were almost all I could find on this topic. If I have more time I’ll try digging deeper. For now though, I’ve edited my comment with links to the studies.
From the point of intelligent design:
We see that there is different sensory focuses. For instance many animals can smell and hear much better than humans do. Some animals have exceptionally better eyes than humans, but overall humans are very focused on vision.
Now when we look at modern inner city environments and the like. Would you think it to be actually better if our senses, particularly our eyes were that much better and delivering even more input to our brains? We already see many people that are overwhelmed in terms of their sensory input and frankly the ones that aren’t still suffer slowly from living in cities. In terms of where we are now, i don’t think it is too bad that we don’t have hawk eyes.
I live with, work with, and am myself part of, the autistic population. So I gotta agree - sometimes, higher sensitivity is a real detriment.
It’s not fun being light-sensitive. I’ve had days where I’ve worn sunglasses indoors, with the lights off and curtains closed. The vast majority of my days aren’t that bad, thankfully, but it truly sucks when light causes physical eye pain and headaches. I’ve got a great eye for detail (and have been called “eagle eye” throughout my life), which benefits me in a number of ways, but unfortunately it also means I get distracted by things others don’t notice. I can’t just “ignore” a lot of things, and when those distractions impact me disproportionately, I’m left in the frustrating situation of guiding others to see (or hear, or feel) the things that are super obvious to me - it feels like leading a child by the hand.
I’m also sensitive to touch (I can’t stand light touch, but I can detect ticks on my skin before they bite) and have the ability to hear novel speech sounds that modern science claims I should’ve lost the ability to detect decades ago (which, okay, is a cool feature to have. But it contributes to being easily-distracted.) All in all, I’ve never known any other way of experiencing the world, but I do know that most people have difficulty understanding my atypical point of view. Which leads to me preferring the company of fellow spectrumites, and others who understand and accept sensory differences.
So this intelligent designer decided to fuck our eyes up some weird convoluted way instead of just… making us see less?
I honestly hope you don’t subscribe to this unscientific garbage.
The eyes of mammals are designed in a way that they “see less” than for instance certain birds or reptiles.
You call this “fuck up some weird convulted way”, when it is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. Thereby it is consistent with the way the visual nerve cells are designed and work together with the rest of physics and chemistry. The design is intelligent as it factors in all aspects as part of a coherent complete design. A design far too complex for any human mind to grasp in full.
Basically your question is like asking, why there is no “magic solution” that directly breaks the observable laws of physics. The genius of the design is in not requiring to break the observable laws of physics to achieve the desired outcome.
You say this is “unscientific garbage” when your only alternative explanation is “everything just happened randomly and here we are.” Neither approach, “intelligent design” nor “extremely long chain of random occurrences” can be empirically observed and only argued logically. I find it unscientific to denounce a hypothesis as “unscientific garbage” when it cannot be falsified, while the counter hypothesis cannot be proven.
Maybe if we eat more cephalopods, our eyes will turn into their good eyes?
That’s how that works, right?
That’s how you get a certain pissed-off Elder God to wake up from his dark dreaming down in the sunken ruins of R’lyeh…
honestly that seems like the good end of the scenario we’re playing out right now
I’m reading this with my poorly designed eyes right now!
I wish we could use genetics or some interest8ng science to fix this.
I’d be down for some cybernetic eyes with better resolution and a zoom option and shit
oh and built in wireless connection so that MaxiEyes Inc. can recommend you products based on what you see at any moment.
Not just eyes.
Also, i wouldn’t consider them “cybernetic”, i’d consider them “improved” or “upgraded”.
Maybe “augmented”?
Who needs augmentation? Let’s just get the organ printer out and update to Mk2 Eyeball.
Can we have an eye transplant from an octopus please? And while we are at it, can we have a couple of tentacles too?
Nope
what if i promise to use the tentacles for music and not sex? i need at least four more arms to play my instrument properly by myself
Nope
Human body is worse than all the JS npm drama shit
Optimization was never the goal. It just has to function well enough for a sufficient portion of the species to reproduce.
Evolution is an optimisation process, just a very slow, wasteful and stupid one. It finds local optima which it usually gets stuck in.
evolution is the epitome of “good enough, ship it!”
Literally the evolutionary equivalent of “eh, good enough”
What’s the smart nerve taking a detour one?
And it does that for both humans… And giraffes. Going from the brain, several meters down to the heart, then all the way back up to the larynx.
Isn’t that just a way to average latency to match up with the other limbs? Nerve connections aren’t instantaneous like electrical wires or fiber optics.
Your larynx isn’t really a limb… But nah, its an evolutionary artefact. In primordial fish it’s a straight line, but then the head moves, a neck forms, etc etc. and the nerve can’t detach and move over, so it gets longer wnd weirder.
Brain usually does that kind of sync on its own. Your conscious experience of reality is actually very slightly in the past because of that.
Vagus nerve
Funny they didn’t use a giraffe for that one. It’s like a few inches out of the way for humans - It’s feet for giraffes
Evolution: bruh all that matters is that you are a horndog.
It’s so weird thinking about how we’re just copying DNA. That’s pretty much the purpose of life; replicate these strange molecules as much as possible. Consciousness is some unintended byproduct of the ‘copy forever’ algorithm.
And the contents of the information being copied is basically a recepie for building a machine that can make copies of the information needed to build that machine…
dat pelvis 🫦
Who the fuck would design ingrown nails??
no but honestly, periods are great. The feeling when all that extra blood leaves your body is amazing. Guys will never know what it’s like being somewhere and sudenly feeling warmth blood running down your legs out of nowhere. Amazing. 10/10 would ome back as a woman again
Triggered lmao. A flood of memories just came back like
I honestly don’t know any proponents of “intelligent design” who are female.
Except the Sycophantic Patriarchal TERFs who do everything their husbands tell them to do.
I cannot describe how much I hate this feeling. It’s probably honestly been protective because I have another reason to always use condoms, and even when I’m drunk, I’m still autistic.
I forget who but a comedian said it well. If we were intelligently designed it was the first design. Why would they ever put the amusement park right next to the sewage system?
George Carlin, I think.
Plenty of animals have their excretion outlet and their food inlet in the same place.
For birds the cloaca is both for excretion and sex.
ah, the orifice of kings
Same reason they mixed the vestibular system with the vision system. Do you want a different body part for every single body function? That’d be a lot of extra weight and things to take care of.
I feel like if there ever was an advertisement park it would be perfectly placed right next to the sewage system.
looks at Disney world
Looks at that one carnival cruise ship
Ha, fair. Fixed now
