The evidence just keeps piling up! We found this at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), one of the major sources of young-earth creationist wisdom. AIG is the online ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the creationist Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia. He also brought you the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum.
AIG’s article is titled Why Do Men Have Nipples?, and it’s written in the form of an answer to a question their creation scientists received, as follows:
My son asked me, “Why do men have nipples?” I did not have a good answer, other than they were made in the image of God. I’ve searched your website because I thought I had read about it before, but cannot find the article. Can you please help me answer this question for my son, who is struggling with the “fiery darts” thrown at him in public school?
We know that this is likely to be a big question for you too, dear reader, so here are some excerpts from AIG’s answer. The bold font was added by us:
Evolutionists often raise this issue as an objection to the concept of a creator God. After all, if there were an all-knowing Creator, why would He design men with a structure for which they have no use? In females, the nipple has an obvious function, that is, to breastfeed a baby. So what’s the purpose for nipples on males?
You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth! Here it comes anyway:
A frequently promoted evolutionary view of male nipples is that they are leftovers from our evolutionary past. They are often considered to be vestigial organs. The vestigial idea suggests they were functional in the past, but as the evolution of man progressed, their function was lost. Upon close examination, this view does not make sense. In fact, this is a very poor evidence for evolution.
If male nipples are, in fact, vestigial, they must have had a more robust function in the past. Does the evolutionist actually suggest that our male evolutionary ancestors breast-fed newborns, and that somehow as evolution progressed, this ability was lost? Alternatively, would the evolutionist argue that our ancestors were all females, that modern males diverged from this all female population, and that in this process they lost the ability to lactate?
We don’t know about you, but our granddaddy weren’t no female! Let’s read on:
The creation model provides a much better explanation for the presence of nipples in males. Male nipples are not a vestige of evolution but are instead a vestige of embryology. They in no way diminish the abilities of the creator God, but are actually another example of His wisdom. Nipples in males are actually an evidence of “design economy.”
Ah — design economy. Of course! We continue:
Very early in their maturation, male and female human embryos are essentially the same. All these embryos have structures that will ultimately form the defining physical characteristics of male and female. [Gooey details omitted.]
We’re not sure we like this “essentially the same” stuff. The Good Book says, in Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” What’s happening at AIG? Here’s more:
It should be clarified, however, that embryos do not all “start out female.” The genetic makeup of each individual is in place from the time of fertilization. Thus the “programming” for “male” and “female” is determined from the outset, and the anatomical gender is simply a result of the expression of those genes.
That’s it? That’s AIG’s reason that males have nipples? Moving along:
If nipples and breasts are “useless” to males, they are equally useless to prepubescent girls, and for that matter are “useless” to any woman who is not breastfeeding a child.
Yeah, okay. Another excerpt:
It should be noted that male nipples are not useless, as has been suggested. They are very sensitive and are a source of sexual stimulation.
Egad! We’re shocked to see such scandalous material at the AIG website! Here’s the article’s conclusion:
Far from being a problem for creationists, the presence of nipples in males is actually another example of the wisdom and creativity of the God we serve. It is, in fact, the evolutionists who have a problem with this issue, as they can provide no reason for the existence and persistence of male nipples in an evolutionary scenario.
So there you are. Creationists don’t have any problem with male nipples. It’s the evolutionists who have the problem. Nya, nya, nyaaaaaaa!
Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.