human tails and the midriff - hiccups, what are the creatonist theories about them?

The fact that we share a muscle contraction with a fish is not significant to me at all. Just because it's a necessity for them, does not mean we shared that necessity in our evolutionary history and it's just left over. If hiccups were necessary for surviving in the water. Why don't dolphins do it? Or crabs? Or Octopus? Not all of our features are necessary. We don't need our pinky's! We don't need our hair. We don't even need to cry. I don't see any reason that we should itch either. This is an elongated tail bone, everybody has one? Some people are born with bigger dicks than others too. If your asking why should people have tail bones at all. Well, they do us great service in sitting down. If we have features common with members of the animal kingdom, I'd say it's because we have a common designer.

I have good hearing, good smell, good taste and sight. Some people do have worse than others, but all of us have worse than the original creation. The whole of Creation has been in bondage to decay ever since the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden.

You are quite right Coyote. I agree with you, but in the post before mine the guy said: He brought up God as being a poor designer. I simply countered with a reason why I believe things are the way they are. I agree that it's a totally religious belief, but he brought it up first.

You are right, you didn't say God. Any reference to a designer is the same as God to me, so it's my mistake. I'll use designer from now on.On a more generic note:
If you believe that there is no designer and the idea of one is bunk. How can you use his apparent design flaws against him? It seems an explanation for those design flaws is all you need to hear, but you are unwilling to accept them on the grounds of being religious, while your very own "design flaw" argument is religious as well.
You point out all of the past mistakes in the design, but you won't consider an argument attempting to explain why those mistakes could be there. If you assert that the design is bad and it's only the designers fault no matter what, and you won't consider any alternative, then you are just as religious and stubborn in your belief as I am in mine.

I use designer, creator, god and/or almighty because they all mean the same thing to me. I have no illusions of a designer being any more of a scientific argument than that of a god. I do not wish to "hide the bible" in anyway. It was most unintentionally done.However, ID's tactics, while not completely up front, are by no means deceitful. I would say Evolution used the exact same tactics back in the day.