August 28th, 2009

Ann Vole

square poo and creationism

The webcomic "Digger" stars a wombat named Digger. The latest strip in "Digger" mentions that Digger was taking a long time "probably taking a crap". I felt I had to mention in the strip's comments section that wombats produce square poo. While looking for an image to back up my factoid, I found a blog of an anti-creationist who was shredding the creationist argument for why wombats have pouches facing backwards (to keep dirt out presumably). While on the subject, this blogger also mentioned the square poo. Wombats seem to mark their territory with this poo and go through extra effort to deposit the poo at wombat nose height by putting the poo on hills, logs, mushrooms, sidewalk curbs, etc. Having square poo seems to be for the purpose of keeping the poo from rolling off these high points. As far as evolution is concerned, it is only worried about the survival of genes from birth to breeding age at which time the effect of such genes to influence how many babies will also have that gene will no longer have a positive effect (and often has a negative effect if animals too old to breed are using up resources needed by futile younger animals). As far as marking territory, this will not change that survivability although it might be an advertisement of female availability (and increase gene survival). My point is that I don't think there is enough advantage of square poo over round to be the genetic source for the physiology changes needed. This makes creationism seem more plausible in my mind as a solution to the wombat design (thick neck, limited need for a sense of smell) and wombat need for territory marking (or advertising of availability of females as a speculative alternate reason for putting poo at nose height). I started this post to say evolution seems to not satisfy a reason but I just proved my argument wrong with my own idea of female availability so the real point of this post is that evolution and creation are both equally provable and lacking definitive evidence either way... you can always find an argument for both sides. It really comes down to faith which is exactly why I feel I am a creationist... if God made His existence clear, then there would be no faith necessary to believe in God. Seeing countless miracles that defy science and logic and having others who also saw such discount it as a dream or explain it away further proves to me that faith is the key dividing factor that this world seems to be here for. I absolutely love those multimammate mice but they are too quick to bite. I hope to breed them and decide each generation based on which ones have faith in me and do not bite so hopefully within a few generations, they will be ready for the pet trade by no longer having an instinct to bite. If I was God, I would be blessing the nations that have faith in me... I wonder about the current changes in political and financial power as a result of efforts of groups like the ACLU to remove faith as a possible reaction from the Americans of the future.