Chapter 1
A few years ago, I realized that the whole intelligent design (ID) controversy is not a scientific issue, but a political one. This goes a long way toward explaining why ID has gotten as far as it has.
ID is not a theory, it is a political pressure group.
Once I realized this, I also realized that my perfect first argument against ID is the male testicle. Why? Because once I mentioned testicles, I knew that people would pay attention. Scientific arguments that grab and hold people’s attention are what is needed.
The problem is that scientists keep approaching ID as though it were a scientific issue, which it’s not. So we make observations, do experiments, and write our papers, showing repeatedly that all the scientific evidence is in favor of evolution. Then we publish our papers in scientific journals where they are read by other scientists. Sometimes we publish wonderful, scholarly books that are also mostly read by other scientists.
I think you see the problem here.
The people who are likely to be persuaded by ID arguments don’t read scientific journals, or lengthy books about evolution, and they never will. Many of the people who would like to argue in favor of evolution don’t read them either. I am not criticizing people who don’t read scientific journals. I am criticizing scientists who behave as though talking to other scientists will solve this problem. It won’t.
This is why we have libraries full of evidence for evolution and most people don’t know it. This means that doing more research won’t make a difference.
What will make a difference is understanding that this is a political issue and treating it that way. Political issues require political arguments, and political arguments are different. Political arguments must be short, easy to understand, memorable, and preferably entertaining.
In my case, I also want them to be true.
So when I started looking for new approaches, I knew I had a winner when inspiration hit me in the middle of an Anatomy and Physiology lecture, while I was lecturing about reproductive systems. The male testicle is a great first argument against ID in the human body, and this brings me to the alternative title for this book:
Evolution, Intelligent Design, and Men’s Testicles: Why Evolution Explains the Human Body and Intelligent Design Does Not
I understand that this may not be considered an appropriate title for library shelves and book catalogs, but undoubtedly, it would get people’s attention. However, once I realized that this was just the sort of thing I needed for a political-style argument, I did what any sensible woman would do under these circumstances. I emailed my minister.
Then my minister did what any minister would do under these circumstances, and he told the entire congregation my realization about testicles in that Sunday’s sermon.
This is not quite as odd as it sounds. I knew that he, along with many other like-minded ministers, was planning to preach a sermon on Darwin. I thought that my observations about testicles would entertain him and help him understand evolution better. I had forgotten that the Darwin service was that Sunday, and I did not realize that my notes on testicles would lead off the sermon.
You can do this kind of thing if you’re a Unitarian.
I later expanded the concept into a booklet, which has been very popular.
There is real science here. My point is to show you a number of examples of how the human body is badly designed. Given that, is it any wonder then that I started with reproduction?
So without further ado, here are the problems with men’s testicles.