Questions For Evolutionists.

[Robert W]

Two simple questions for Religious Evolutionists:

1) How did the earliest organisms reproduce before they evolved sexual organs?

2) If the earliest organisms were able to reproduce without sexual organs, then why was there a need for them (sexual organs) to evolve in the first place?

The very first chapter of the Bible openly discusses the two sexes matter-of-factly. It not only discusses that two sexes existed from the beginning but discusses the purpose of sexual relations between a man (he) and a woman (she).

This topic can be put into several books trying to resolve the entire issue.

I recommend the reading of the excellent book with the title of Cradle of Life by Professor Schopf.

First is the question of life. Is a carrot's life equal to any animal life? Schopf goes into details as to what is life. What is needed to have life. It is very interesting for the scientific minded who are not trying to prove GOD or disprove GOD. If you want to know this topic, this book will enrich your life. A common question is the eye. What made the eye necessary and how did the life with the first eye get it and why?

 

[Couchpotato]

Simple organisms don’t have sexes

How does that answer the question?

 

[SaxonJackson]

Fission is still around, it didn't 'give way'.


Fission works well for simple organisms where each is fully formed and fully functional. For more complex organisms there has to be a period of development to grow organs so simple fission wouldn't suffice. With so much invested in the offspring you want genetic diversity to give it its best shot.

Why did fission "give way" (in some cases) to sexual reproduction? How did organisms reproduce during that period of time that they were evolving sexual organs, but the organs were no functional? Why did simple organisms need to evolve at all? Do you have faith in the theory of evolution?

 

[SaxonJackson]

No ... both persist in nature ... both thrive ... the mistake you make is forgetting how over-dominate single-cell life is on Earth ... just a tiny few species contain two or more cells ... almost all of life that has ever existed are a single cell and just simply divides as a method of reproduction ...

Farmers have always saved the seed from their best plants for next year's crop ... is that part of Evolution okay to use? ... or do you offer a different system? ... Evolution is just a tool, do you blame hammer and chisels for Satanic Temples now? ... generally we blame the people who use these things for evil ... and praise those who use it for public benefit ...

Still ... nobody can answer the "why" an efficient organism that could reproduce without the need for sexual organs would find it necessary to evolve them.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There's an easier answer for Christian lowbrows. The god created everything 6000 years ago.

again dumbass few people make that claim.

 

[ReinyDays]

Still ... nobody can answer the "why" an efficient organism that could reproduce without the need for sexual organs would find it necessary to evolve them.

Here in the "Science and Technology" forum ... we tend to focus on "How" ... that's what science does, tells us how and so allows us to predict future outcomes ... the answer to the "Why" of it all is a philosophical question ... because my answer is "Why Not?" ...

I'm sorry ... science requires you to present an alternative theory that correctly explains all that we see ... something better than evolution ... keep in mind, ferns have sex completely differently than humans ... and DO NOT look up barnacle sex .... ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ... it's sickening ...

 

[SaxonJackson]

Here in the "Science and Technology" forum ... we tend to focus on "How" ... that's what science does, tells us how and so allows us to predict future outcomes ... the answer to the "Why" of it all is a philosophical question ... because my answer is "Why Not?" ...

I'm sorry ... science requires you to present an alternative theory that correctly explains all that we see ... something better than evolution ... keep in mind, ferns have sex completely differently than humans ... and DO NOT look up barnacle sex .... ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ... it's sickening ...

Science literally means "knowledge." Every question must be asked. You can't sweep the tough questions under the rug. If they can't be answered with actual facts and evidence, then they're a lot more valid than you wish them to be.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How did organisms reproduce during that period of time that they were evolving sexual organs,

In dark movie theaters and the back seats of cars.

 

[SaxonJackson]

In dark movie theaters and the back seats of cars.

During that period when cars were evolving from the "nuts" and "screws."

 

[forkup]

Two simple questions for Religious Evolutionists:

1) How did the earliest organisms reproduce before they evolved sexual organs?

2) If the earliest organisms were able to reproduce without sexual organs, then why was there a need for them (sexual organs) to evolve in the first place?

The very first chapter of the Bible openly discusses the two sexes matter-of-factly. It not only discusses that two sexes existed from the beginning but discusses the purpose of sexual relations between a man (he) and a woman (she).

1) It's called mytosis. No sexual organs required if you reproduce by dividing cells.

2) The requirements to survive are different in different environments. This causes an increase in complexity. Eventually leading to all kinds of adaptations, including sexual organs... Or eyes, or fins, or lungs,etc.etc.

 

[ReinyDays]

Science literally means "knowledge." Every question must be asked. You can't sweep the tough questions under the rug. If they can't be answered with actual facts and evidence, then they're a lot more valid than you wish them to be.

No ... science is the method of obtaining knowledge ... you can ask the question, but science can only address what is observable, measurable and can be duplicated ... and this is done at the molecular level ...

You've been given the answers, you're just not understanding them ... take a class in biology and gain some basic knowledge yourself ...

 

[SaxonJackson]

No ... science is the method of obtaining knowledge ... you can ask the question, but science can only address what is observable, measurable and can be duplicated ... and this is done at the molecular level ...

You've been given the answers, you're just not understanding them ... take a class in biology and gain some basic knowledge yourself ...

You have given zero adequate answers. Evolution is not observable, measurable, nor can it be duplicated in a lab setting. It's all based on conjecture, hypothesis, wishful thinking, imagination, and faith. Nobody, to date, has given a good reason why an efficient form of reproduction was replaced by a more cumbersome method of reproduction.

 

[SaxonJackson]

1) It's called mytosis. No sexual organs required if you reproduce by dividing cells.

2) The requirements to survive are different in different environments. This causes an increase in complexity. Eventually leading to all kinds of adaptations, including sexual organs... Or eyes, or fins, or lungs,etc.etc.

Interesting that all these different "adaptations" ended up growing male and/or female organs. Since "Mitosis" is clearly the most efficient form of reproduction, then why don't we see complex life forms utilizing said form of reproduction? Just another big mistake resulting from "billions" of years of forward progress?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You have given zero adequate answers. Evolution is not observable, measurable, nor can it be duplicated in a lab setting. It's all based on conjecture, hypothesis, wishful thinking, imagination, and faith. Nobody, to date, has given a good reason why an efficient form of reproduction was replaced by a more cumbersome method of reproduction.

Evolution is not observable, measurable, nor can it be duplicated in a lab setting.

Why do you feel that way?

 

[forkup]

Interesting that all these different "adaptations" ended up growing male and/or female organs. Since "Mitosis" is clearly the most efficient form of reproduction, then why don't we see complex life forms utilizing said form of reproduction? Just another big mistake resulting from "billions" of years of forward progress?

What are you talking about. Mitosis still happens. And there are plenty of examples of species that reproduce asexually. Even complex lifeforms.

These are basic biological facts.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Interesting that all these different "adaptations" ended up growing male and/or female organs. Since "Mitosis" is clearly the most efficient form of reproduction, then why don't we see complex life forms utilizing said form of reproduction? Just another big mistake resulting from "billions" of years of forward progress?

Since "Mitosis" is clearly the most efficient form of reproduction

Define efficient.

 

[surada]

Evolution: Vangas beat Darwin’s finches in diversity

The diversity of the Madagascan vangas is unique. The bird family only consists of 22 species, but these cover the whole range of body size of the passerines, the bird group vangas belong to (6,000 species). Whereas smaller species use their comparatively small bill to feed by picking up...

www.sciencedaily.com

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Two simple questions for Religious Evolutionists:

1) How did the earliest organisms reproduce before they evolved sexual organs?

2) If the earliest organisms were able to reproduce without sexual organs, then why was there a need for them (sexual organs) to evolve in the first place?

The very first chapter of the Bible openly discusses the two sexes matter-of-factly. It not only discusses that two sexes existed from the beginning but discusses the purpose of sexual relations between a man (he) and a woman (she).

Is your Google broken?

Why don't you look up what biologists say?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Evolution is simply impossible....it's like saying the code for running the USMB Board was just a series of random accidents and that is FAR LESS complicated than even a virus.

Sorry, it's nothing like that. There are no natutal pressures acting on lines of code to produce a functional message board. Your analogy doesn't work.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If Bill Gates had any idea how much more complex a cell was than any Windows operating system, he'd call evolution BS

A dumb thing to say. The global scientific community is aware of that.