Giraffe laryngeal nerve and evolution

I would just like to know how on earth creationists in this forum would explain this particular example of evolution’s blunders: why would an intelligent designer make the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe go from its brain and all the way down the neck to then go around some arteries only to circle back all the way back up to the larynx?

http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2010/06/the_laryngeal_nerve_of_the_gir.php

http://scientopia.org/blogs/thisscientificlife/2010/06/22/the-laryngeal-nerve-of-the-giraffe-is-proof-of-natural-selection/

( there are many more websites like the above about this subject )
In evolution this makes sense because this is exactly the kind of sloppy design of anatomy you would expect from a mindless process.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I would just like to know how on earth creationists in this forum would explain this particular example of evolution’s blunders: why would an intelligent designer make the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe go from its brain and all the way down the neck to then go around some arteries only to circle back all the way back up to the larynx?

http://sc ...[text shortened]... e this is exactly the kind of sloppy design of anatomy you would expect from a mindless process.

Maybe it's about un-intelligent design?

I notice the deafening silence from the Creationists here.

Could it be that we have finally found something [empirical evidence] that not only proves their absurd belief false but which is so obviously sound that even they would concede ( by their silence ) that they are unwilling to conjure up some twisted logic against it? -answer; yes.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I notice the deafening silence from the Creationists here.

Could it be that we have finally found something [empirical evidence] that not only proves their absurd belief false but which is so obviously sound that even they would concede ( by their silence ) that they are unwilling to conjure up some twisted logic against it? -answer; yes.

It does not prove their belief false, it only provides strong evidence against it, and how strong you evaluate that evidence to be, depends largely on how well you understand evolution.
You cannot show that the design is definitely sloppy or a blunder as you suggest, you can only show that it appears to be so. Evolution is certainly the best explanation, but then that applies to just about everything in Biology.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I notice the deafening silence from the Creationists here.

Could it be that we have finally found something [empirical evidence] that not only proves their absurd belief false but which is so obviously sound that even they would concede ( by their silence ) that they are unwilling to conjure up some twisted logic against it? -answer; yes.

From your point of view , yes.
From an spiritual evolutionary point of view? Who knows? Not you.

I'm sure you could find even more wierder examples of this backward kinda thing.
I've always wondered about sloths. what the hell is THEIR purpose?

And I'm not saying that we shouldn't question , or that science is wrong.
Its just that to get in the spirit of creationism I believe you have to ask the right questions.
Where is this all coming from? Who are we?
Where do these lines of reasoning take you?
Takes me to some very absurd places at times.

And yes, your right. The christians should attempt to answer, after all they treat this forum like it is their domain. 🙂 :0

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I notice the deafening silence from the Creationists here.

Could it be that we have finally found something [empirical evidence] that not only proves their absurd belief false but which is so obviously sound that even they would concede ( by their silence ) that they are unwilling to conjure up some twisted logic against it? -answer; yes.

I would think that the creationists and the Inteligent Design people would answer:

"God created this anomalous giraffes to make Darwinists confused..."

Originally posted by twhitehead
It does not prove their belief false, it only provides strong evidence against it, and how strong you evaluate that evidence to be, depends largely on how well you understand evolution.
You cannot show that the design is definitely sloppy or a blunder as you suggest, you can only show that it appears to be so. Evolution is certainly the best explanation, but then that applies to just about everything in Biology.

I agree.

I just get frustrated when I cannot imagine how on earth they reconcile their beliefs with empirical evidence that contradicts their beliefs. Do they simply ignore such evidence? Or do they somehow make themselves forget it? Or not see or hear it? If so, I find it hard to imagine how anyone can mentally do that.
If not, do they use some kind of twisted logic to convince themselves that the evidence doesn’t contradict their beliefs? –perhaps by somehow dismissing such evidence as irrelevant? If so, I find it hard to imagine what “logic” they could think up that could do that.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
I would think that the creationists and the Inteligent Design people would answer:

"God created this anomalous giraffes to make Darwinists confused..."

Or better:

“God created a vast ocean of totally irrefutable empirical evidence on earth and throughout the whole universe to fool all reasonable rational thinking people to come to the inescapable logical conclusion that we evolved and the earth is millions of years old so that only unreasonable irrational non-thinking people with blind faith in His existence ( and he carefully and completely removed all trace of evidence of His existence for extra good measure ) could “know” the truth and thus be saved in the afterlife”

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I would just like to know how on earth creationists in this forum would explain this particular example of evolution’s blunders: why would an intelligent designer make the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe go from its brain and all the way down the neck to then go around some arteries only to circle back all the way back up to the larynx?

http://sc ...[text shortened]... e this is exactly the kind of sloppy design of anatomy you would expect from a mindless process.

The nerve helps massage the arteries so the blood can go all the way up that long neck. God never makes a mistake! 😏

Do you think you could improve a giraffe through surgery - untangling the nerve manually?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I would just like to know how on earth creationists in this forum would explain this particular example of evolution’s blunders: why would an intelligent designer make the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe go from its brain and all the way down the neck to then go around some arteries only to circle back all the way back up to the larynx?

http://sc ...[text shortened]... e this is exactly the kind of sloppy design of anatomy you would expect from a mindless process.

If the nerve was too short, giraffes wouldn't be able to think before they spoke.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The nerve helps massage the arteries so the blood can go all the way up that long neck. God never makes a mistake! 😏

Do you think you could improve a giraffe through surgery - untangling the nerve manually?

“…The nerve helps massage the arteries so the blood can go all the way up that long neck….”

I haven’t heard of this one. Any evidence of this?

“…Do you think you could improve a giraffe through surgery - untangling the nerve manually?...”

No; but I don’t see how that is relevant:
How can an all knowing/powerful “God” be intelligent enough to design a functional neck and yet stupid enough to make a nerve take such a pointlessly unnecessary long route? –a mistake wouldn’t even be made by your average human halfwit! Don’t you think that that would be a strange logical inconsistency?

On the other hand, this would be just the kind of inconsistency you would expect from unintelligent sloppy evolution.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“…The nerve helps massage the arteries so the blood can go all the way up that long neck….”

I haven’t heard of this one. Any evidence of this?

“…Do you think you could improve a giraffe through surgery - untangling the nerve manually?...”

No; but I don’t see how that is relevant:
How can an all knowing/powerful “God” be intelligent enough t ...[text shortened]... is would be just the kind of inconsistency you would expect from unintelligent sloppy evolution.

I'm just playing around.

Its painfully obvious that the same basic design plan has been used for various sets of animals. For example, all mammals share a set of characteristics, and within the mammals there are sub groups each sharing sets of characteristics etc. Thats how we classify them into the various biological classifications. I believe that in all mammals the nerve in question goes round the same set of arteries. It is quite likely true for marsupials too.
Now if you are a creationist, you can:
1. Ignore this pattern.
2. Assume that God had a reason but what it was remains unknown.
3. Come up with an explanation as to why God would stick to a given design plan even when it doesn't seem practical.

For me however, the most reasonable explanation is that they are all related. The similarities in design and in DNA - and especially the similarities in DNA that is not required for design make this so obvious that you have to have really strong religious reasons for not accepting it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Its painfully obvious that the same basic design plan has been used for various sets of animals. For example, all mammals share a set of characteristics, and within the mammals there are sub groups each sharing sets of characteristics etc. Thats how we classify them into the various biological classifications. I believe that in all mammals the nerve in qu ...[text shortened]... ake this so obvious that you have to have really strong religious reasons for not accepting it.

You missed one:

if you are a creationist, you can:

4. say that all the designs of life ARE OBVIOUSLY perfect and if they themselves ( the creationist ) designed life they would OBVIOSLY design our retina’s in our eyes back-to-front so that the blood vessels obscure our vision and they would OBVIOSLY design the aryngeal nerve of the giraffe to take that route because all of these deisignes are OBVIOUSLY the best designs –it is simply self evident!

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I would just like to know how on earth creationists in this forum would explain this particular example of evolution’s blunders: why would an intelligent designer make the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe go from its brain and all the way down the neck to then go around some arteries only to circle back all the way back up to the larynx?

http://sc ...[text shortened]... e this is exactly the kind of sloppy design of anatomy you would expect from a mindless process.

So exactly what problems if any arise from this design?