I just noticed this article over at Dr. Kent Hovind’s site, written by John Hinton: Things that make evolutionists look stupid—Tailbones.

Most of Mr. Hinton’s commentary solidly exposes the logical discombobulation that Darwinians try to pass off on us as science. He poses difficult, but simple questions they can’t answer like, “Why don’t we still have tails when they’d be so useful?” and “Why does coccyxless Ashley Murry wear a diaper and regularly scat in her pants?”

Of course there’s no reasonable answer for either. But there’s more to the story. Yes, something that is missing from John’s argument is the sexual component of having a tail. I try to avoid discussing sex on this site, because I know it’s offensive. But on this important topic, I see no other option.

Please do not let your children read any further.

If the evolutionary rapscallions want us to believe that everything on our body happened for a reason AND that the quickest way to propagating a mutation is through a reproductive advantage—then there is no explanation for why these flexible appendages aren’t casting a shadow of decency over each of our buttockses right now!

Think of it this way: if I have a tail and my reproductive competitor does not…who do you think our eligible suitor will engage in intercourse with? Me, as usual. I have an extra appendage with which to satisfy my mate and therefore, by evolutionary definition, my seed will be planted and my tailless opponent will become extinct—or banished to the Galapagos.

For decades one of the best selling sexual aids has been a ring that’s worn by a man at the base of his genitals to prolong the sexual experience. I won’t tell you what it’s called, but a homonym for the term is Cock Ring…as in the playing field for a Rooster fight. Another item that has been a staple of any brothel for as long as I can remember is a device that I’ve taken to calling a Freedom Tickler (formerly French Tickler).

What do these perversions have to do with the length of your coccyx? Everything. Imagine how a monkey uses his tail to hang from a branch. You don’t need to let your mind wander too far to know how a tail could be used by prehistoric man during a romantic encounter to enhance his own performance. Should that technique fail, the cave dweller could relax on his back and let his built in Freedom Tickler wrap things up for him.

Besides the obvious performance advantages that a tail would afford our species, consider the convenience this appendage would offer in the form of restraint. The Peacock is forced to participate in an extravagant dance in order to lure his mate. Sometimes the female is impressed, sometimes it isn’t. What if the Peacock’s plume was hiding a monkey’s tail? The dance would switch from being a simple courtship ritual, to being a Trojan horse intended only to get the female within tail-striking distance.

The same benefits would be utilized by humans. If a man could deliver his tail with enough force to knock a female onto the ground, he could follow up with some type of restraining knot and then have his way. Should this fail, the tail could be used to fling semen at an escaping partner’s genitals, much in the same way primates are able to throw their feces at zoo patrons.

With this new information, I would encourage anyone to explain why modern man has no tail. Unfortunately for evolutionists, there is no rational explanation other than tails look stupid on people, and so the designer (God) made a decision that we shouldn’t have one.

Sometimes the easiest answer is the correct answer. It’s as simple as that.