UncommonGoods

search


Creature Feature

An Intelligent Designer on the Cow

Our Creator's stream of consciousness while fabricating the cow
by Dave Ng
21 March 2007 Comments 16 Comments

An Intelligent Designer on the Cow
Image: Dave Ng with the help of ASCII Art
An Intelligent Designer on the Cow   Print An Intelligent Designer on the Cow   Email An Intelligent Designer on the Cow   Digg

Related Books

Today, I feel like doing a plant – no, an animal. Yes, today, I am going to make an animal. And it will be a masterpiece. I shall call it the.... No wait! Maybe I should think of the name later. Yes, you should always name your pieces after you have completed them. Better that way.

OK then. An animal it is. More specifically, a vertebrate. Large body, four legs, one tail, one head, usual stuff on the head – i.e., let’s just follow the standard animalia rubric. Nothing exciting there. Not yet anyway. So let’s give it an armored tail, with poisonous tendrils and a stink that can kill. Oooh, I like that – but maybe it’s too much. Why such a fancy tail? Maybe the tendrils can come out of its nostrils (note to self: Have I designed nostrils yet?). And the stink can come from the body itself.

But it doesn’t quite feel right. Feels forced. No matter, I suppose I can simply start over. Besides, I did the poisonous tendrils last week. But keep the stink? Yes, let’s keep that.

I know. How about we give it three, no eleven, no four stomachs! Four stomachs! For the efficient eating, of the grass. I am truly inspired! Don’t stop there. How’s this? This animal should urinate milk. From its groin, no less. From little appendages which I will humbly call teats that collectively, communally, reside on a mound of tissue I will call a brother.

Now I am on a roll. Milk will flow from the teats of this animal’s brother.

No wait, I cannot call it a brother. This animal has no lips – don’t want it to have lips – too common a thing for a masterpiece. Seen that, done that, yesterday’s news. But you can’t say the word “brother” without lips. Poor animal, that would be cruel. Instead, let’s call it an udder. Yes, an udder – that’s much better.

Now, of course, I need to work in a clown somehow. I love clowns. In truth, clowns are my all-time favorite design. How will I do this? Perhaps give the animal a raucous and overt sense of humor? Make it wear funny shoes? Make it scare the shit out of young children? No, not subtle enough – I want this animal to be so much deeper than that.

What if, and I’m just saying things as they come to me, this animal-can-be-ground-and-shaped-into-a-meat-patty- which-can-be-mass-produced-and-fried-on-heating-elements, and-then-sold-by-a-corporate-entity-bent-on-feeding-the-obesity-line-to-young-children -by-using-as-their-public-representation-and-symbol, a-clown, whom-we-shall-call-Jesus (no-wait,-let’s-save-that-one-for-later), whom-we-shall-call-Ronald-McDonald, and-these-meat-patties, which-will-be-inexplicably-and-mysteriously-called-hamburgers -after-a-completely-different-animal-I-haven’t-created-yet, will-also-be-considered-sacrilegious-by-fully-one-sixth-of-the-world’s-population, and-oh-oh-why-is-it-that-the-numbers-0157-cry-out-to-me? because-OH-MY-GOODNESS-I-can’t-believe-it, but-this-stuff-is-just-so-brilliant!

...

Take a breath. WHheeeew-hooooooo. Calm down. That’s pretty good. But maybe just think about some of the simple things now. Like color. Yes, color is good. And easy – let’s go with the rustic look, plus spots. Et voilà. We have finished yet another creation, which for some reason, I feel inclined to call a cow. Hold on, one last thing. It shall go “moo” when it speaks. Yes, that’s a nice touch, even if I do say so myself. People are sure to talk about that one, maybe even create a song or two.

Comments 16 Comments | An Intelligent Designer on the Cow   Print | An Intelligent Designer on the Cow   Email | An Intelligent Designer on the Cow   Digg

Related Articles





Comments

I glad too see this interest site, I tell my friends about it!

Looks very interesting.
Thanks for sharing.

Sir,
ID is most often and wrongly linked to God and creationism, as opposed to Darwinism and evolutionism. We are there in fact facing an old philosophical problem transposed this time from man to the universe: the difficult and even impossible distinction between what is innate and what is acquired. But the reader of my pages http://controlled-hominization.com/ will perhaps agree that evolutionism is not in contradiction with all forms of ID. As a materialist, I think that the confrontation between both concepts is sterile and that a synthesis is even possible.
If any great complexity of a feature could not exclude evolutionism, science itself could not reject some forms of ID in the evolution of the universe, at least in some steps of the process. After all, man himself is already a local actor in this evolution, an actor showing little intelligence so far (global warming, life sciences …). He could however be led to play a greater and nobler part if he succeeds to survive long enough (dissemination of life in the cosmos, “terraforming” of planets, planetary and even stellar formation, artificial beings…). The development of this kind of “draft ID” could only be limited by our refusal to do so and by our ability to survive. We would be viewed as gods by our ancestors from the middle Ages, and we would also view our descendants as gods if we could return in a few hundreds or thousands years.
By his refusal to consider that intelligence could already have played a significant part in the evolution of this universe, man takes in fact for granted that he is the most advanced being. It is in fact just another way for placing himself once again in the middle of everything, as for the Earth before Galileo. This anthropocentric view is not very rational.
Within the frame of evolutionism, the concept of ID could however be applied to the future man if he manages to survive long enough to be able to play a significant part in the evolution of this solar system, in the galaxy, and why not more. And it could also apply to eventual advanced ET preceding man in this cosmic part, advanced ET who could for instance, thanks to their science, have already played a significant part, even if they were themselves born from random processes.
Without going back to a controversial God, pure intelligence born from random processes is so far too easily ignored in the evolution of this universe, and I think that this choice has more to do with faith in man’s solitude in the universe than with true science. Even if it appears later that the ID concept has yet never been used by other beings in this universe, what could prevent man from applying it in the future? As with the Big Bang, ID would certainly remain in the field of hypotheses, but science progresses that way, and it would not be scientific to exclude one hypothesis that could be quite credible. ID is too easily discarded and laughed at, somewhat like continental drift not long ago, and a lot of other concepts too.
Sincerely, Benoit Lebon

We mostly see super-specialized, highly pedigreed farm cows here in the Webby West nowadays, so it's like you're musing on God's designing of "the dog." And didn't Darwin offer sheep as an example of human design? There's something profane about this whole joke.

just to be nerdy, but the fatal, enterohaemorrhagic strain of E. coli is numbered O157, where O represents the German word ohne meaning without. This dates back to microscopy being used to identify/categorise bugs. Some looked like they had breathy stuff round their edges and were given H numbers from Hauch and German for breath; those without were given O numbers. Nowadays things are more sophisticated and the numbers relate to the type of specific antigens on the surface of the bugs. The full name of the particularly nasty E. coli is in fact E. coliO157 H7.

So now you guys can all get grumpy when you see 0157 written in the papers. We'll give this article the benefit poetic license, not least of all because DN no doubts knows better!

Had you written another 10,000 words I'd have read them all. Still laughing.

Brilliant. Too good not to share (may I?)

The commenter who mentioned Eddie Izzard was absolutely dead-on. smile

is this rly what happend

A point to consider

Intelligent designer # of living creations = trillions

Dave NG = 0

No experience = No idea!!!

They're called Hamburgers cos they were invented in Hamburg.

The deadly strain of E. coli is the strain numbered 0157. How very intelligent.

funny stuff.
um, why the number 0157?

I just loved how the clown got stuck into the story. I was thinking it had a clownish look to it due to the black and white "coating". But nope, you went further ahead and got old Ronny in there somehow.

Loved the read smile

That was a very enjoyable read. For some reason I could hear Eddie Izzard's voice saying all of this. His jokes seem to be a stream of consciousness, so I guess it fit perfectly. Nicely done.

So what is the deal with them being called "hamburgers?"

Songs?

Hey I'm a cow, I'm curious/Hey watch me now, I'm furious.

Hey I'm a cow, I'm full of hate/Hey watch me now, I'm on your plate.

Thank you, Andy Creeggan!



Add a Comment

Name


URL


Email



Remember my personal information
Notify me of follow-up comments?

Help us fight spam by typing the word you see below in the field: