THE UROGENITAL SYSTEM \u2013 EVIDENCE FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Can a self-replicating system that requires two unique components to perform one function arise by random mutations?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Biological life began with simple cell division\u2014one cell divides to become two cells, which divide to become four cells, etc. According to Darwin and Neo-Darwinists this simple division process evolved slowly over eons by the natural selection of random mutations to eventually create humans. But is this possible over any length of time?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The transition from cell division to sexual reproduction involves extremely complex physiology, and I contend cannot be attained by \u201cnumerous, successive, slight modifications\u201d as Darwin requires lest his theory \u201cabsolutely breakdown.\u201d This transition may be incalculable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To complete the transition let\u2019s examine what is involved. First, all biologic and physiologic information must be present in the DNA code that sexual reproduction is producing. But the production of the single DNA code that leads to the production of one model requires two models of one species that must be physiologically distinctive yet uniquely compatible. These two distinctively unique models must arise from the same fertilization process and proceed through a complicated physiologic transformation arising from the same embryonic, fetal, and adolescent maturation processes. This means numerous specific three-dimensional molecules must be present in every cell and either inhibited or activated according to a precise plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These distinct physiologic transformations reside within the urogenital system. As you can infer, the reproductive system is integrally related to the urinary system. And sexual reproduction must be viewed through both systems simultaneously. In his textbook on embryology Larson notes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In both sexes germ cells and sex cords are present in both the cortical [superficial] and medullary [deeper] regions of the presumptive gonads, and complete mesonephric and paramesonephric ducts lie side by side. The ambisexual or indifferent phase of genital development ends at this point and, from the seventh week on the male and female systems pursue diverging pathways.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n So, what causes males and females to develop differently? Obviously, this development is under genetic control as is everything else in the human body. As we all learned in high school, females have two X chromosomes, and males have an X and a Y chromosome. Genetic research has determined that a gene on the Y chromosome (SRY) is expressed in the sex cord cells at the end of the sixth week, and the male heads off on his own way. Larson describes this differentiation process:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The product of this gene, called the SRY protein, initiates a developmental cascade that leads to the formation of the testes, the male genital ducts and associated glands, the male external genitalia, and the entire constellation of male secondary sex characteristics.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n This is an amazing and astonishingly complex process. In order to provide a sense of just how numerous and poorly understood some of these processes are, I present quotes that are taken from section headings or subsection headings in Larson\u2019s embryology textbook. I have italicized terms that conceal complex processes<\/em>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson, who is very knowledgeable about human embryology has this to say about the current state of knowledge on the singular subject of testicular descent, \u201cThe hormonal control of testicular descent is not completely understood. Androgens and pituitary hormones are important, but other unknown testicular factors or hormones apparently play a role, as does neural input via the genitofemoral nerve.\u201d[14]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Darwin\u2019s theory of evolution by natural selection and \u201cnumerous, successive, slight modifications\u201d cannot provide any insight into how these extremely complex embryologic functions (the italicized terms in the previous quotes) operate. Sexual differentiation is the epitome of complexity in DNA programming. A conundrum exists where the reproductive system creates and is created by itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n All the structures and steps in the operation of sexual reproduction must be present at the outset. If this is not the case, Neo-Darwinists must tell us which structures and functions could have been deleted, or how sexual reproduction could proceed with which missing structures and functions that were to come later in time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The reproductive system seems to require foresight because it creates only one of two types of humans (male or female) per pregnancy (aside from the twin gestation), but complete reproductive function requires both types of humans (male and female). This means the system was created with the future dependency on another organism to provide the needed complimentary function to complete a singular function\u2014the fertilization of an egg.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How does the human body accomplish this future complimentary function? Obviously, the same materials needed for the construction of a male are used to create a female. We know these as male and female analogs. The following chart is a quick and simplified summation of the male and female analogues that arise from an embryonic organ that is influenced by different DNA programming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n TABLE I<\/p>\n\n\n\n