Simple evidence for ID

How about this Scientific American article, abstract below.If Humans Were Built to Last; March 2001; by S. Jay Olshansky, Bruce A. Carnes, Robert N. Butler; 6 page(s)"Bulging disks, fragile bones, fractured hips, torn ligaments, varicose veins, cataracts, hearing loss, hernias and hemorrhoids: the list of bodily malfunctions that plague us as we age is long and all too familiar. Why do we fall apart just as we reach what should be the prime of life?The living machines we call our bodies deteriorate because they were not designed for extended operation and because we now push them to function long past their warranty period. The human body is artistically beautiful and worthy of all the wonder and amazement it invokes. But from an engineer's perspective, it is a complex network of bones, muscles, tendons, valves and joints that are directly analogous to the fallible pulleys, pumps, levers and hinges in machines. As we plunge further into our postreproductive years, our joints and other anatomical features that serve us well or cause no problems at younger ages reveal their imperfections. They wear out or otherwise contribute to the health problems that become common in the later years."I think the reasons we haven't evolved better physical bodies and functionality to live longer are at least two fold.We already live well past the age when we have reproduced (if we are going to) and provided parental care.
Natural selection does not act on traits post-reproductive age - there is no fitness gained from any improvements at this pont.Secondly, we are tied into a number of inferior bone arrangements for upright walking, as described in the article, because we evolved originally as quadrupeds, and there are other evolutionary constraints that prevent us from evolving what might be significant funcational 'improvements' given our current way of life.So, if we were 'designed', it certainly wasn't the best design for living as long as most of us are now.

Please, tell me you are not serious about this.

Meaning he should have come up with a better design by now ?

I'm sorry. That was a facetious remark.
It didn't warrant a serious response. Well I like to play pool, but it can be hard to find a good opponent, so I know exactly what you mean. Tough competition is what it takes to improve. Evolution works the same way.I gather you mean to imply that God made us imperfect so we would have to strive to improve ourselves.
I would say that, if there is a God, you are probably right.
Because from my 'naturalistic' perspective (here's a word I never seem to use outside of this forum) there is no such thing as perfection. It is an abstract anthropocentric ideal without any biological relevance. No matter how well-adapted a species to its niche, that niche is a dynamic hyperspace of selective forces that will *always* be subject to change over time in one way or another. The species must then change also, or become extinct. Perfection is unattainable in evolution.This message has been edited by EZscience, 05-18-2005 12:09 PM