Loftus in the big chair

“David Hume argued that if he could come up with one improvement to God's purported creation that it would call into question God's goodness. He suggested four things, one of which is that God could've created us with a greater propensity to work (more energy). So let me open this up for discussion. If you were God, what would you reasonably do differently to make this a better world with less suffering?”

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/08/what-could-god-have-done-differently.html

On the face of it, a world without John Loftus would be a better world. But, thankfully for Loftus, I’m not God.

I’d add that my theodicy is sufficiently robust that it can even account for the apparently gratuitous evil of John Loftus.

“ Let me be the first to suggest an improvement. God could've created human beings by adding a pair of wings to our backs so that we could fly. There would be no more falling to our deaths. We would have better transportation such that there would also be fewer fatalities on our roadways and airways. Such a winged improvement would result in less suffering than our present bodies. We know God could've done this because there are naturally existing birds in this world who fly. So why didn't he?”

This is classic. You have unbelievers like Loftus who pay lip service to science, only to suggest the “improvement” of grafting a pair of wings onto a 200 lb. man.

A flying man would not be a man. Loftus is conveniently ignoring the physical constraints on flight.

How much can a bird weigh and still fly?

Do birds have hands with opposable thumbs?

What’s the tradeoff between blood flow, brain size, and flight?

What’s the tradeoff between respiration, brain size, and flight?

What’s the tradeoff between the metabolism of a bird and the metabolism of a man?

If a creationist were to propose a flying man, he’d be greeted with utter scorn from the secular scientific establishment.