Did God design us badly ?

This was printed in the New Zealand Herald as a "Talking Point". The idea of the "Talking Point"s is that people respond, and they print some of the responses. They didn't print mine; those they did print were clearly inferior. Perhaps mine was too clever for them.

( I have suppressed the original author's identity, because I wouldn't want this published about me, even if I had done it. Apart from that, the text is the same as the original. )

Stimulus ( from New Zealand Herald, 2004 September 25-26, A22 ) :

If created, we humans were poorly designed.

From the discovery of early hominids through to the genetic similarity of all creatures from amoebas to people, the evidence in favour of evolution is overwhelming. However, my strongest criticism of Ross Adams' letter is that the "complex design of the human body, brain and intellectual capacity" is any sort of argument against evolution.
Human beings are a shockingly poor design. We are lousy with redundant systems that serve no purpose but whose failure can be catastrophic for the owner ( wisdom teeth and appendix to name just two ). We are made up of components with failure rates shorter than the rest of the owner ( for example, heart failure and cancer ).
Our brains wear out and we get dementia. We are filled with instinctive irrational urges - we obviously want to eat far more than is needed to stay healthy. And with respect to our intellectual capacity, the evidence is that many people are severely lacking in this department ( particularly the ones who believe in primitive superstitions such as creation ).
All of this points to layers of fudge-factors that solved problems as they came along - in other words, evolution. If we were really designed by some infinite being, then he should be made to repeat his stage 1 engineering design paper at university or risk being awarded a C- at best.
Response :

Your correspondent's understanding of engineering appears to be rather shaky. An engineer designing - say - a tap designs it to specifications known to the engineer; the preferences of the tap are not taken into account. Your correspondent's opinions on his own design are therefore unlikely to be very significant. The Designer who ( I believe ) designed me designed my body to live for a while and then die; I am confident that it will do exactly that, which sounds to me like an A grade, at least.
I agree that the design of the human body is compatible with evolution. If ( as I also believe ) it was the Designer's intention that I should be able to choose whether or not to believe in his existence, then it seems to me that evolution is just the sort of tool which he might use. That must be A++.
Unfortunately, as I believe in creation, my intellect must be suspect. Creation fits in very well with the unfortunately named "Big Bang" theory. In fact, I can't imagine any cosmological theory with which it wouldn't fit; all you have to do is assert that it's how the Designer designed it. Whether or not you choose to do so is a matter of faith, just as the Designer intended. Perhaps your correspondent, with his superior intellect, might explain why that's a "primitive superstition".

Alan Creak,
2004 October.

Stimulus ( from New Zealand Herald, 2004 September 25-26, A22 ) :
	If created, we humans were poorly designed. From the discovery of early hominids through to the genetic similarity of all creatures from amoebas to people, the evidence in favour of evolution is overwhelming. However, my strongest criticism of Ross Adams' letter is that the "complex design of the human body, brain and intellectual capacity" is any sort of argument against evolution. Human beings are a shockingly poor design. We are lousy with redundant systems that serve no purpose but whose failure can be catastrophic for the owner ( wisdom teeth and appendix to name just two ). We are made up of components with failure rates shorter than the rest of the owner ( for example, heart failure and cancer ). Our brains wear out and we get dementia. We are filled with instinctive irrational urges - we obviously want to eat far more than is needed to stay healthy. And with respect to our intellectual capacity, the evidence is that many people are severely lacking in this department ( particularly the ones who believe in primitive superstitions such as creation ). All of this points to layers of fudge-factors that solved problems as they came along - in other words, evolution. If we were really designed by some infinite being, then he should be made to repeat his stage 1 engineering design paper at university or risk being awarded a C- at best.
Response :
	Your correspondent's understanding of engineering appears to be rather shaky. An engineer designing - say - a tap designs it to specifications known to the engineer; the preferences of the tap are not taken into account. Your correspondent's opinions on his own design are therefore unlikely to be very significant. The Designer who ( I believe ) designed me designed my body to live for a while and then die; I am confident that it will do exactly that, which sounds to me like an A grade, at least. I agree that the design of the human body is compatible with evolution. If ( as I also believe ) it was the Designer's intention that I should be able to choose whether or not to believe in his existence, then it seems to me that evolution is just the sort of tool which he might use. That must be A++. Unfortunately, as I believe in creation, my intellect must be suspect. Creation fits in very well with the unfortunately named "Big Bang" theory. In fact, I can't imagine any cosmological theory with which it wouldn't fit; all you have to do is assert that it's how the Designer designed it. Whether or not you choose to do so is a matter of faith, just as the Designer intended. Perhaps your correspondent, with his superior intellect, might explain why that's a "primitive superstition".