Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Not true. The Theory of Evolution is all that scientists feel that they have to cling to (in the face of stark discrepancies, problems, and contradictions). But they hold on tightly to this fairy tale because they would rather believe a lie than to believe in God.
You are describing some Christians like yourself, not scientist. I bet you don't even know any scientists.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are describing some Christians like yourself, not scientist. I bet you don't even know any scientists.
EVOLUTION THEORY:
"Sexual reproduction came about by evolution."
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
"Two humans had to evolve at the same time and place, having complementary reproductive systems. If one system wasn't complete or compatible, the species would become extinct."
How Did Life Begin?
Originally Published in Return to God Magazine
Volume 1, Number 1, p4
http://nwcreation.net/articles/howlifebegin.html
Explain this Shakyamunison.
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveAre you hallucinating?
Not true. The Theory of Evolution is all that scientists feel that they have to cling to (in the face of stark discrepancies, problems, and contradictions). But they hold on tightly to this fairy tale because they would rather believe a lie than to believe in God.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[B]EVOLUTION THEORY:"Sexual reproduction came about by evolution."
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
"Two humans had to evolve at the same time and place, having complementary reproductive systems. If one system wasn't complete or compatible, the species would become extinct."
How Did Life Begin?
Originally Published in Return to God Magazine
Volume 1, Number 1, p4
http://nwcreation.net/articles/howlifebegin.htmlExplain this Shakyamunison. [/B]
Sexual reproduction started long before there were humans on the Earth. So, can you rephrase the question? As it is, it is invalid.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
How did a primordial cell produce male and female humans? You cannot have one without the other?
At one time, all life used Asexuality to reproduce. However, it became an advantage to split the reproductive traits into two sexes. I do not know the details, but I have seen a show on TV that covered this topic. Therefore, there is information out there on this topic. I suggest you look it up.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
At one time, all life used Asexuality to reproduce. However, it became an advantage to split the reproductive traits into two sexes. I do not know the details, but I have seen a show on TV that covered this topic. Therefore, there is information out there on this topic. I suggest you look it up.
This makes no sense.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
This makes no sense.
Sure it does. The problem with asexuality is that the offspring are genetically the same as the parents. Bacteria that were asexual started swapping genetic material. This swapping gave some an advantage, and they passed it on. Aphids us both asexuality and sexuality, as an example.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
At one time, all life used Asexuality to reproduce. However, it became an advantage to split the reproductive traits into two sexes. I do not know the details, but I have seen a show on TV that covered this topic. Therefore, there is information out there on this topic. I suggest you look it up.
"Sex is the queen of problems in evolutionary biology.
Perhaps no other natural phenomenon has aroused so much interest;
certainly none has sowed so much confusion."
- Graham Bell, 1982
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Sure it does. The problem with asexuality is that the offspring are genetically the same as the parents. Bacteria that were asexual started swapping genetic material. This swapping gave some an advantage, and they passed it on. Aphids us both asexuality and sexuality, as an example.
"The production of males is a "cost" that lowers the fitness of species in a competitive world. In many species, the males does nothing for the species other than providing sperm. For example, the male lion does not hunt for food or take any part in the rearing of young. However, males must be fed by the females, which uses up half of their food resources with no benefit produced in return. The male lion reduces the "fitness" of the species by two-fold. Here is another example of how sexual reproduction costs a species. Let us say that there are a million members of a species of sexually reproducing snails. At some point, there arises one female that is able to reproduce asexually. This female produces two females while her sexual cousins produce one male and one female. Therefore, for each generation, the asexual snails produce twice as many reproducing members as the sexually reproducing species. According to population dynamics, the asexual mutants would completely replace the original population within 52 generations.2 Despite the increased cost of sexual reproduction, it persists over asexual reproduction."
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
"The production of males is a "cost" that lowers the fitness of species in a competitive world. In many species, the males does nothing for the species other than providing sperm. For example, the male lion does not hunt for food or take any part in the rearing of young. However, males must be fed by the females, which uses up half of their food resources with no benefit produced in return. The male lion reduces the "fitness" of the species by two-fold. Here is another example of how sexual reproduction costs a species. Let us say that there are a million members of a species of sexually reproducing snails. At some point, there arises one female that is able to reproduce asexually. This female produces two females while her sexual cousins produce one male and one female. Therefore, for each generation, the asexual snails produce twice as many reproducing members as the sexually reproducing species. According to population dynamics, the asexual mutants would completely replace the original population within 52 generations.2 Despite the increased cost of sexual reproduction, it persists over asexual reproduction."
And then a disease comes along and kills all of the asexual females that are genetically the same. Your quote above is stupid. It does not take into consideration the real world. If you are going to quote other people, find someone with an education, or stop quoting them out of context.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And then a disease comes along and kills all of the asexual females that are genetically the same. Your quote above is stupid. It does not take into consideration the real world. If you are going to quote other people, find someone with an education, or stop quoting them out of context.
Like I said your make-shift explanation about sexual reproduction does not make sense, that quote supports my statement.