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

The Fall?That's a religious belief, not something supported by scientific data.In fact, it is absolutely contradicted by scientific data.This is the Science Forum. If you want to persist in believing this myth, perhaps you can provide some scientific data to support your position?(Please consider the advice of my tagline in preparing your answer.)

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This is the Science Forum, and it seems you are peddlin' religion.Unless you have scientific evidence to back up these claims, perhaps?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Creationism has made a lot of predictions--they're a dime a dozen ($19.95 for the whole book) in the various creationist literature and websites.Problem is, those predictions (based entirely on religious beliefs) fare poorly when tested against empirical evidence. That doesn't deter creationists, as more predictions (or the same refuted ones) are easy to come by ("Get our next book, only $29.95, and see how evolution has failed!").
Examples of major failed predictions: global flood; young earth; geocentrism; devolution based on "the fall;" and "kinds."Do those failures effect TRVE Believers? Not a whit. Empirical evidence has no effect on their religious beliefs.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.