Why do men have nipples?

[CabVet]

As to why you guys don't find this or that ... well ... I'll withhold answering that for obvious reasons.

Yeah, probably "because God didn't make them", right? Perhaps he was too busy making sure that everything fit together according to the theory of evolution.

 

[freezerman2000]

Platypusses don't have nipples, but they are considered mammals. They do have specialized lactation glands, but no nipples.

Also, why don't we find an animal with feathers and nipples?

Any other mammals that don't have nipples?
I was not aware of that fact.Thanks

 

[Loudmouth]

I just stopped by to answer the OP ... that's all ...

As to why you guys don't find this or that ... well ... I'll withhold answering that for obvious reasons.

The creationist explanation seems to be that nipples are used for other things than lactation. The evolutionists are saying that there is such strong selection for nipples within mammalian species that they are even expressed where they are not needed (e.g. in males).

It would seem to me that the creationist explanation leads to the question of why we don't see nipples in species that do not lactate.

 

[Loudmouth]

Any other mammals that don't have nipples?
I was not aware of that fact.Thanks

The other example is also the other living species of monotreme, the echidna. Both have specialized hair bundles where they secrete milk, and the young lap up the milk from the hair. It's almost as if they are in a transtional state . . .

 

[NailsII]

Any other mammals that don't have nipples?
I was not aware of that fact.Thanks

The other example is also the other living species of monotreme, the echidna. Both have specialized hair bundles where they secrete milk, and the young lap up the milk from the hair. It's almost as if they are in a transtional state . . .

Beaten to it!

 

[AV1611VET]

I thought the question was about why men have them?

What's with platypuses and monotremes and echidna and everything but?

 

[freezerman2000]

The creationist explanation seems to be that nipples are used for other things than lactation. The evolutionists are saying that there is such strong selection for nipples within mammalian species that they are even expressed where they are not needed (e.g. in males).

It would seem to me that the creationist explanation leads to the question of why we don't see nipples in species that do not lactate.

Nipples on males could be considered as erogenous zones...

 

[Loudmouth]

Nipples on males could be considered as erogenous zones...

So why don't male birds have them?

 

[freezerman2000]

So why don't male birds have them?

Because the are not mammals??

 

[freezerman2000]

Loudmouth, I'm on your side..no need to grill me!

 

[mathetes123]

Because that's how God designed us.

Those tissues are not gender specific; meaning that women weren't given a monopoly on them.

Baby bottles have them, as well as pipe-machining equipment and lathes.

To think that, since men have some parts that only women should have if they were created by God ... therefore evolution ... is erroneous.

Design does make more sense than random chance.

 

[mathetes123]

Nipples on men presents more questions than answers for the evolutionist:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/07/01/feedback-why-do-men-have-nipples

 

[46AND2]

Nipples on men presents more questions than answers for the evolutionist:

{link} Feedback: Why Do Men Have Nipples? - Answers in Genesis

Wow. It's like you didn't even read the rest of the thread...

 

[mathetes123]

Wow. It's like you didn't even read the rest of the thread...

It would appear you did not read the linked article.

 

[46AND2]

It would appear you did not read the linked article.

Sure I did. And it was thoroughly discussed on the first couple pages of this thread.

 

[mathetes123]

Sure I did. And it was thoroughly discussed on the first couple pages of this thread.

I don't read every response in a thread, especially if it is 11 pages long. Not enough time in the day. I try to respond to the more current posts. It appears the points made in this articles have been lost on the more recent posters and so it bears repeating.

 

[46AND2]

I don't read every response in a thread, especially if it is 11 pages long. Not enough time in the day. I try to respond to the more current posts. It appears the points made in this articles have been lost on the more recent posters and so it bears repeating.

Er, yeah. Kinda my point.

 

[mathetes123]

Er, yeah. Kinda my point.

Do you read every response in every thread in which you respond?

 

[46AND2]

Do you read every response in every thread in which you respond?

yes.

 

[mathetes123]

yes.

You would be the exception. Do you have anything worthwhile to discuss other than whether I read every post of this 11 page thread?