3
   

Why We Shouldn't Believe In Erections

 
 
Chumly
 
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 05:49 pm
With the recent thread on why we shouldn't believe in evolution, I thought it best to get to the heart of the matter and discuss why we shouldn't believe in erections.

Ok then, given that there is no such thing as evolution, how could there possibly be such a thing as an erection?

If we came from a cell how is it possible for us get an erection? Any doctor can tell you that there are many components that make up the penis, so for us to be able to see all of the parts of the penis it must have come together at one exact time. Then all of the sudden we went from not having sex to having sex? Surely it's much more likely that women simply lay eggs and bury them in the sand and reproduction takes place asexually.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 3 • Views: 633 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 06:02 pm
@Chumly,
Boy, you're hittin' close to home with that one, Chum. I mean, I want to believe in the possibility of an erection, I really do. I think there must be some empirical evidence for it somewhere.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 06:09 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Many probably need an Erector Set.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 06:16 pm
I would like to add that my wife is particularly adept at mensuration and thus has my measure at hand.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 06:21 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:
Boy, you're hittin' close to home with that one, Chum. I mean, I want to believe in the possibility of an erection, I really do. I think there must be some empirical evidence for it somewhere.
If you are a creationist you should believe yours came into fruition at full bore, which would not be a very sizable outcome, given your uncertainties.
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 06:55 pm
@Chumly,
I believe that if you take the matter in hand and face the hard facts, you'll find that over the course of milenia there have been, not one, but several erections, perhaps several dozen even. But, ontologically, what does it all mean?
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 01:18 am
Perhaps some test may be devised.
Impossible for evolution, but tantalizing for erections.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 06:07 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
It means that ontogeny does not recapitulate phylogeny.


(That sentence sticks in my mind from back in school, maybe my genetics class, but more likely way before that, i.e., a million years ago now.)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

IS IT OK FOR ME TO CHEAT? - Question by Setanta
ADAM'S RIB - Discussion by Setanta
THE GREATEST EVIL . . . - Discussion by Setanta
Water is dry. - Discussion by izzythepush
Satan's Mental Make Up - Discussion by Setanta
PLEASE HELP NOW PLEASE!!!! NOW! - Discussion by chai2
WAY DOWN . . . BELOW THE OCEAN . . . - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Why We Shouldn't Believe In Erections
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.06 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 08:49:01