Having just read the circumcision of your son article and now this one, I can’t help but wonder, do you think the foreskin is vestigial?

Would you rather try to defend it as being “intelligently designed”?

It is one thing to make a coffee pot. I can make a darned coffee pot. It is quite another thing to make a coffee pot that will keep improving itself based on variables that did not exist at the time it was created.

Reminds me of one of the best SciFi novels I ever read, The Mote in God’s Eye (or probably it was the sequel, The Gripping Hand), which had a small plot element involving a coffee maker that mysteriously improved “itself”…

David: Okay, I just need to take credit for a little bit of prognostication I did in my earlier post.

Is it prognostication if you’re just reading my del.icio.us bookmarks?

As for the prognostication? Look at the last two paragraphs:

To modern eyes, it may seem strange to think of a snake with legs.

But look at some of the more primitive modern snakes, such as boas and pythons, and you’ll see evidence of their legged ancestry - tiny “spurs” sited near their ends, which today are used as grippers during sex.