# Quiz in honor of Darwin's 200 anniversary, and why many Republicans would not take it **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 12, 2009, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quiz-in-honor-of-darwins-200-anniversary-and-why-many-republicans-would-not-take-it/485557 "2009-02-12T17:17:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quiz-in-honor-of-darwins-200-anniversary-and-why-many-republicans-would-not-take-it/485557/101 "2009-02-16T21:55:05Z")
> [@LilShieste](#): > > By the same token that IDers reject evolution by saying, “it’s too complex to have happened by chance”, their own arguments are rejected by saying, “it’s too flawed to have been designed.” > > For example, certain cars get really crappy gas mileage. This in itself could be seen as a flaw in the design, unless it served a purpose; e.g., a trade-off for higher acceleration or top speed. > > All of the flaws that have been pointed out in natural world objects have no conceivable justification to have been designed as such. You’re assuming an omniscient, omnipotent Designer who would have wanted the best design possible. As I understand it, the Intelligent Design theory, in its pure form, simply states that living organisms were designed by _some_ Intelligence as opposed to evolving naturally by unaided chance. While that “some Intelligence” is identified with the Christian God by many of ID’s supporters, that is neither an axiom nor a conclusion of ID per se. There’s no such thing as “too flawed to have been designed,” since we’ve all encountered human-designed things that are seriously flawed. This post should not be taken as being in support of Intelligent Design. I am not a proponent of the theory, but I do think it has more naive appeal than it is often given credit for. ---
**Author:** ![flex727](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/258eb7/32.png) [@flex727](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flex727)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2009, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quiz-in-honor-of-darwins-200-anniversary-and-why-many-republicans-would-not-take-it/485557/102 "2009-02-19T21:21:07Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > 1. Why does each of your eyes have a blind spot and strong a tendency toward retinal detachment? But a squid whose eyesight is just as sharp does not have these flaws? Something I haven’t seen brought up, but can a squid’s eye rotate in the eye socket like a human eye can? ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2009, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quiz-in-honor-of-darwins-200-anniversary-and-why-many-republicans-would-not-take-it/485557/103 "2009-02-19T22:34:33Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > You’re assuming an omniscient, omnipotent Designer who would have wanted the best design possible. No, I’m just assuming a designer that put some real thought into their design. Any such designer would acknowledge that their design will not be perfect, but would identify the flaws in their design, and determine whether or not fixing them is worth the effort or time. Why would a creator have chosen to keep these design flaws, instead of attempting to fix them? Laziness? Impending deadline? (BTW - I appreciate you making these points, despite not being a supporter of the idea; keeps us honest.) > [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > There’s no such thing as “too flawed to have been designed,” since we’ve all encountered human-designed things that are seriously flawed. I completely agree; which is why I compared the statement to “too complex to have happened by chance” (i.e., there’s no such thing). ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2009, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quiz-in-honor-of-darwins-200-anniversary-and-why-many-republicans-would-not-take-it/485557/104 "2009-02-19T22:40:48Z")
> [@flex727](#): > > Something I haven’t seen brought up, but can a squid’s eye rotate in the eye socket like a human eye can? According to this site, it sounds like it’s very likely (if not certain). [http://www.sites.si.edu/exhibitions/exhibits/squid/main.htm](http://www.sites.si.edu/exhibitions/exhibits/squid/main.htm) > [@](#): > > Volleyball-sized eyes at the sides of its head scan the surroundings for a likely target; once spied, the eyes rotate forward so that the squid can better judge the distance to its prey. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quiz-in-honor-of-darwins-200-anniversary-and-why-many-republicans-would-not-take-it/485557.md?page=5)