Re: Those bones... are they all there?

American Scientific Affiliation (
Thu, 9 Jan 1997 13:06:43 -0500 (EST)

Dear Listserv,

Tim wrote to ask about the old question of ribs. You can see my answer
below. I am not an anatomist but have never heard of any difference in rib
count between normally developed males and females but any of you can have
fun answering him as well. Who knows, this might start another whole
flurry of mail like the brain size and sweat discussion. I look forward to
the seminars in Heaven when we find out the real truth. Until then we have
to depend on our collective, finite wisdom to do the best we can. Keep at
it! Now I have gotten myself into it when I said that I would not but this
is it for me on this one. I will not respond to comments made on the
material below as I have no vested interest in them but will simply learn
from you if there is something to learn.

Don (Munro)

>To: "tim of the north" <>
>From: (American Scientific Affiliation)
>Subject: Re: Those bones... are they all there?
>Dear "Tim of the north"
>To my knowledge there is no difference between the rib count of males and
females. The idea stemmed from the Biblical mention of God using one of
Adam's ribs to form Eve. If a literal rib was used, that did not change
Adam's genes which still programmed for the original number of ribs. If it
had changed Adam, then Lamarchianism would be true. This says that physical
changes of the body result in future developmental changes and stemmed from
the old, obviously disproved idea that pangenes came from different areas of
the body to enter the egg and sperm (depending on whether they thought the
male or the female determined structure - many thought the male and that the
female just housed the fetus which helped to leave us with the legacy of a
difference in the worth of the sexes which we must get over ENTIRELY).
Obviously, if a part was not there, the pangene could not come. Weismann
did an experiment where he cut off the tails of mice for many generations
and the mice continued to be born with tails. If you lost a leg before
puberty, then the chance would be that your child would be born without a
leg. None of that is true unless there is a gene mutation. I will send
your note out to the Listserv and you may receive more comments from them.
> Don Munro, ASA Executive Director
>>I have heard that the human female has more ribs than a male. Is this true?
>>If so does a primate have the same chacteristics? Maybe you can point me in
>>the right direction as to find the ansews to my questions...
>>Thanks for your time and consideration..
>>Please E-Mail me at