In the theory of evolution what came first, after the asexual critter or what ever it was, male or female?
2006-07-13 22:48:57 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
yeah maybe adam was more ape like
2006-07-13 22:53:54 · update #1
you can't be serious...
2006-07-13 22:51:57 · answer #1 · answered by rayhanna 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Evolution has shown obviously that there are many ways that creatures procreate. The penis and vagina in the begining were resultant of mutated DNA. This accident was a good thing and nature has adopted this pattern for most land species.So what are you talking about adam?Why would the only human on earth feel the need to name himself?So he wouldnt be confused with all the other humans that didnt exist.God people are so monotonously retarded it makes me sick. Does it actually hurt you to think? If it doesnt then why dont you try it sometime?
2006-07-14 06:04:13 · answer #2 · answered by isaac a 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The beautiful part is this......
You actually hit the whole evolution thing on the head.
If things just grew and came out of the ocean or whatever evolutionists think.....
...then what is this thing with male and female? How could these things reproduce from one being. We always need two!
So, there had to be two creatures that just fit, if you know what I mean.
If not then how did they split into male and female?
Evolution makes no sense except that believers in it have a convenient way of eliminating God..which is what they want to do.
2006-07-14 06:37:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Adam who?
The asexual, amoeboid-type life-form evolved after a long period, to produce a biological life-form of a different sort which was incapable of self-replication, requiring two very similar yet somehow different life-forms of a kind necessary to create a form of itself... male? female? Not of any matter or real distinction, a biologic abberation at the time... over the ensuing millions of years, many alterations of genetic matter occured... some resulted in improvement, others in a negative, defective sort of manner... survival of the more fit enters, stage right...
2006-07-14 06:18:00 · answer #4 · answered by nomad 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a genetic scientist I feel more than qualified after 7 years of studying genetics to say that the human race does not come from 1 founding member (Adam, or anyone else for that matter).
2006-07-14 06:32:43 · answer #5 · answered by well_clever_i_am 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It may be the case that all biological entities are both male and female and capable of change when the need arises. Why do men have nipples?
2006-07-14 05:56:34 · answer #6 · answered by rvn 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, that is just a "fantasy" tale, composed of some literate minds, conjecturing on the possibility of something more finite being involved in the development of the human species... albeit, one which has caused much breast beating and heated discussion, between learned individuals, emotionally overwrought, religeously fanatical simpletons, and poorly educated cretins...
2006-07-14 06:01:30 · answer #7 · answered by Zed 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We all came from Adam and Eve.
2006-07-14 05:56:33 · answer #8 · answered by bburgandy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Donot relay on the conclusions.
Seriouly think on how people make these kinds of stories
2006-07-14 05:55:15 · answer #9 · answered by The Knowledge Server 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
adam and eve is just a fairy tale told via a load of men. if god was real he'd give his commandments to women instead of men. men think with their penis! :(
2006-07-14 05:52:53 · answer #10 · answered by stingub40 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
maybe
2006-07-14 06:36:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋