h a l f b a k e r yResults not typical.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
There are several body parts that some say are not required: tonsils, foreskin, appendix, even the gall bladder.
So why not remove them all at birth and be done with it?
Tails for all
Tails_20For_20All
Body part addition [nineteenthly, Mar 16 2005]
Gills for people
Gills_20for_20people
I should've known that would be here somewhere. [nineteenthly, Mar 16 2005]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
I can walk on my hands, lets lop my legs off. |
|
| |
Let's take this to a macro scale and just remove all non-essential people. Imagine the efficiency improvements! Imagine the improved conservation! |
|
| |
And all those stars out there ... they'll have to go. |
|
| |
//So why not remove them all at birth…// But leave the umbilical cord which might come in handy later. |
|
| |
the tonsils help prevent throat infections for one thing. |
|
| |
Then, just your luck, some halfbaker invents a use for the gall bladder when you're 35. |
|
| |
The gall bladder and appendix can be used to store batteries (in the future, when humans become partially computerized) |
|
| |
No, no,no. More on gyroscopes, please. |
|
| |
What's a moron gyroscope? |
|
| |
Sit in one at 100rpm for half an hour and you'll find out. |
|
| |
Seriously, I find my foreskin to be an erogenous zone. And it's a protection device. I do not want to part with it. |
|
| |
Too much information, [zeno]!. Time Out! Time Out!. |
|
| |
To answer the question [Ling]: //So why not remove them all at birth and be done with it?// I suspect that areas of your discourse include invasive surgery that cannot safely be performed on a newborn and the remainder are a matter of religious choice. No need to standardise it!. |
|
| |
The idea of organs being unnecessary is fallacious. Tonsils and the appendix guard against infection and the gall bladder enables partly digested food to be emulsified more efficiently. The coccyx is there as an attachment for various muscles and there are many other examples. People may be able to survive without these organs but they provide a safety net and reserve capacity for the body. For instance, the foreskin, apart from its erogenous value, can be used for skin grafts. If they were truly unnecessary, they wouldn't be there. Most people have no traces of gills, for example, even though these could be potentially life-saving in some situations , and of course most people have no external tail at all, even though lots of people here wish they had. |
|
| |
Nineteenthly - whilst agreeing 100%
with the general tone of your
annotation, I cannot reconcile myself to
the notion that my foreskin (whose
continued presence or absence I will
leave as a mystery - Zeno take note)
evolved as a pre-adaptation to allow
skin grafting. |
|
| |
Come on, there must be plenty of bits and pieces that are just hanging about, waiting to cause misery in later life.
Just think: "You are a proud father of a 7lb baby boy"
"Is that net or gross?"
Anyway, what's wrong with my gyroscopes? |
|
| |
Those baby teeth are just gonna fall out anyway, might as well remove those too. |
|
| |
I didn't mean it was actually there as an adaptation for skin grafting. I just meant it could be used for that purpose. |
|
| |
Nineteenthly - ah, I see, in which case
we are as one on this matter. |
|
| |
I wonder if you could make an external ear or an eardrum out of a foreskin. |
|
| |
(waits patiently for the punchline) |
|
| |
It might make a nice coat for a mouse. Or you could sew a lot of them together and make a lovely soft pair of gloves... |
|
| |
...or if you rub it, it becomes a suitcase. |
|
| |
I'm sorry, I must've come here by mistake. <rushes out red-faced> |
|
| |
"Doctor, there's a problem with my face burn skin graft. When I feel horny the blood rushes to my cheeks." |
|
| |
The ear mouse wasn't actually a GMO was it? |
|
| |
<refrains, with great difficulty, of making more comments about his foreskin> |
|
| |
nope, [nineteenthly], it was just a masterful bit of grafting, which is reasonable since apparently there's evidence of skin grafts occuring as far back as 3000BC. |
|
| |
What about the pinky toes? Do they really do any good? Oh...and don't forget there are people who have no arms or have no legs...they get along nicely...and what about politicians with no brains...they do great in the Democrat Party. There are an entire host of parts we could do without. |
|
| |