Originally posted by Godzilla Rulz
How or why? The same way freckles, red hair, down syndrome, partial color blindness, excessive body hair growth, and a million other mutations occur. Cell division.
Asexual reproduction merely produces clones. What I want to know is how, or more importantly why sexual reproduction appears to prevail over asexual reproduction, given asexual reproductions obvious advantages.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Asexual reproduction merely produces clones. What I want to know is how, or more importantly why sexual reproduction appears to prevail over asexual reproduction, given asexual reproductions obvious advantages.
The only real advantage in asexual reproduction is a [possible] greater number of offspring/organisms. But that also runs the risk of food source depletion/overcrowding.
There is a huge downside to asexual reproduction though, fewer gene variation and therefore a much greater risk to disease and defect. Similar as to why too much inbreeding is not good in sexual reproduction.
Basic H.S. biology, dude.
To answer your question, Evolution. Sexual reproduction produced species more fit for survival in a given setting. So we **** our mates, instead of ourselves.
Originally posted by Robtard
The only real advantage is asexual reproduction is a [possible] greater number of offspring/organisms
I don't even know if that is true...
not that asexual organisms don't produce more offspring, just that I don't think it is a rule or anything. Theoretically, thousands of eggs could be laid at once, like how fish do it.
thinking about it, I suppose the only type of asexual reproduction I know of is cellular division, so I probably shouldn't talk
Originally posted by inimalist
you have it wrong, sexual reproduction provides many advantages over asexual reproductionsuch as, the ability to eliminate flaws in the genetic code, more variance in the offspring, etc
but ya, its a JIA thread...
But...how did males and females (according to evolutionary theory) come to exist separately?
Originally posted by inimalist
I don't even know if that is true...not that asexual organisms don't produce more offspring, just that I don't think it is a rule or anything. Theoretically, thousands of eggs could be laid at once, like how fish do it.
thinking about it, I suppose the only type of asexual reproduction I know of is cellular division, so I probably shouldn't talk
Why I said "possible". It takes two humans to produce one offspring, while it take one earthworm to produce one earthworm.
As you noted, there are species (fish, insects, arachnids etc) that lay hundreds if not thousands of eggs. Though I do think the main reason why species that lay vast quantities of eggs is most likely due to an extremely high mortality rate of the young from egg to sexually active adult.
Originally posted by Robtard
The only real advantage in asexual reproduction is a [possible] greater number of offspring/organisms. But that also runs the risk of food source depletion/overcrowding.There is a huge downside to asexual reproduction though, fewer gene variation and therefore a much greater risk to disease and defect. Similar as to why too much inbreeding is not good in sexual reproduction.
Basic H.S. biology, dude.
To answer your question, Evolution. Sexual reproduction produced species more fit for survival in a given setting. So we **** our mates, instead of ourselves.
That doesn't explain how the asexual cell evolved into advanced, male and female organisms with the capacity to reproduce.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That doesn't explain how the asexual cell evolved into advanced, male and female organisms with the capacity to reproduce.
Originally posted by Robtard
Mutation. Likely trillions of tiny little mutations over extremely long lengths of time.
Originally posted by inimalist
but ya, its a JIA thread...
Originally posted by Robtard
Why I said "possible". It takes two humans to produce one offspring, while it take one earthworm to produce one earthworm.As you noted, there are species (fish, insects, arachnids etc) that lay hundreds if not thousands of eggs. Though I do think the main reason why species that lay vast quantities of eggs is most likely due to an extremely high mortality rate of the young from egg to sexually active adult.
couldn't agree more
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But...how did males and females (according to evolutionary theory) come to exist separately?
I think that is still an open question actually, I'm not a geneticist though, so there are probably more appropriate places to ask this question, if you were actually interested in the answer...
are you suggesting that the inability to explain absolutely every part of evolutionary history is evidence that evolution didn't happen?
Originally posted by inimalist
couldn't agree moreI think that is still an open question actually, I'm not a geneticist though, so there are probably more appropriate places to ask this question, if you were actually interested in the answer...
are you suggesting that the inability to explain absolutely every part of evolutionary history is evidence that evolution didn't happen?
My objective is to stimulate honest inquiry. This is a pivotal question that should have a plausible, scientific answer if it is a fact.
Originally posted by inimalist
here JIA:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction
I'm not interested in reading Wikipedia. Why don't you make an attempt to explain to me in your own words.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Mutations are mostly harmful not beneficial.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB101.html
1 Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.
2 Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).3 Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).
4 High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000).
5 Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Besides, what is the mechanism for mutation? What causes mutation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_mutation#Causes
JIA: have you heard of wikipedia?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Mutations are mostly harmful not beneficial.Besides, what is the mechanism for mutation? What causes mutation?
And the ones that aren't is what Evolution is about. A gazelle born slower than it's kin isn't likely going to live and pass it's "slow gene" on.
There are several theories. Mutations happen now, could be random, could be environmental factors, could be viruses could be a combo, could be something else. They do happen though, this is a fact. There's a fairly sound theory that viruses are the fire for Evolutionary change, that and the environment.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
My objective is to stimulate honest inquiry. This is a pivotal question that should have a plausible, scientific answer if it is a fact.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I'm not interested in reading Wikipedia. Why don't you make an attempt to explain to me in your own words.
1 - I'm not a geneticist or even a biologist. If you have questions about evolution and neurology, the brain, psychology, etc, I can probably give you a better answer
2 - you just flat out admitted you wont read the answer if provided
3 - my history of debating with you is filled with spending far too much time explaining concepts you will hand wave away. If you want to discuss, please show some indication that you are willing to put in the effort
Originally posted by inimalist
1 - I'm not a geneticist or even a biologist. If you have questions about evolution and neurology, the brain, psychology, etc, I can probably give you a better answer2 - you just flat out admitted you wont read the answer if provided
3 - my history of debating with you is filled with spending far too much time explaining concepts you will hand wave away. If you want to discuss, please show some indication that you are willing to put in the effort
Sharing information is not debating. I'm not here to debate, I'm here to exchange information.
Wikipedia is not peer-reviewed information; it can be written by anyone, so, I take it with a grain of salt.