A hard question to non-believers , do you want to answer it ?

Question

our cars . is it male or female ..
if it is male .. then can scientists make or design female cars .
if it is female . then can they make or design male cars ..

so the two kinds can marry .. and we will never need to car factories ..
is it possible or not ..

my point is : if it is impossible .. how could evolution make and design male and femele of humans , insects , birds .. etc ..
but we can't make or design male and female cars ..
is it an ordinary thing (sex concept) .
can this concept exist without god ( a very able and very clever one ) ..

WHY EVOLUTION SHOULD INVOLVE WITH LIVING THINGS ONLY .. IS IT HIS MAJESTIES PROFFESSION NOT INVOLVE WITH DEAD THINGS !!!!

Answer 1

You are babbling incomprehensibly, and if you think that any of this has anything at all to do with evolution, then please go find your science teacher and slap him/her.... you got cheated out of an education.

Answer 2

You've found the fundamental problem with creationism. Creationists think that God created all life because living things are complex, and the things humans create are complex, therefore living things must be made by something intelligent like Humans.

They deny the difference in HOW those two different types of things are made. We know and can observe the biological processes that create life quite well. Living things initiate from molecules and assemble themselves from atoms and molecules of their enviornment. Cars need the hands and materials from their creators every second of their manufacturing process. Living things grow from simpler forms to more complex forms. Cars stay the same level of complexity until they start to decay due to human neglect and entropy.

The logical error is that creationists attempt to explain how something came to be by a comparison of existing features, not a comparison of the process which created those features. Object A is complex and Object B is complex, therefore they must have been made the same way. But if you were to use the same logic for other characteristics, then you would end up with ideas like "a plant is green, a frog is green, therefore a frog is a plant." or "My house is a rectangle, my shoebox is a rectangle, therefore my house must be made in a big shoebox factory."

Science tells us that cooperation and specialization are common traits among living things formed by the nature of the challenges that life faces. This has been simulated several times over, and is the subject of numerous books. One form of this specialization is the separation of sexes.

Answer 3

What are you talking about?

CARS ARE NOT LIVING THINGS!

You should also know that some frogs, if presented with the environment of only a single sex (i.e. all male), that they will change into a different sex to procreate? That is a very simple form of evolution. You should look that up.

And yes we can clone human beings, therefore, we can create male or female. Why does god have to be involved in something as simple as that? Could it not possibly be our own scientific evolution?

Answer 4

The sex concept only applies to living things. There are certain kinds of amphibians that possess both sex organs, or more impressive, can switch genders when there is too few of one sex in the population. Does this prove evolution, as these amphibians are almost able to guarantee the survival of their race? Why would the human way of reproduction be the only way? Surely you can wrap your mind around the idea that life could exist in entirely different forms.

Answer 5

Evolution studies Living things. Cars are not living things. And not all life needs sex in order to multiply. Worms do not need to copulate in order to reproduce. Neither do frogs. Scientists have also shown that rabbits will do this if there are no mates around.

You assume that Evolution, the scientific form... not what others make of it... is trying to disprove God. It doesn't.

Now seeing as you hold to the Genesis creation... which one is correct? There are 2 Genesis accounts of creation and they differ greatly in some areas. Which one is 100% correct?

Answer 6

First, cars are not living things and can not reproduce. But, at some point in Earth's history small sacs of non-living organic chemicals did begin to reproduce-- the moment that life arose.

According to evolutionary theory, life formed about 3.5 Billion years ago (BYA). Sexual reproduction first occurred about 2.5 BYA. This gives nature approximately 1 Billion years to develop sex.

We have been building cars for about 100 years or so.

Thus nature has had 10,000,000 time longer than us to devlop sexual reproducing organisms.

I would bet that if we work on it for this long we could figure out how to make cars sexually reproduce.

Answer 7

That is the strangest babble I've ever seen. Cars are not living things. Therefore, they are neither male nor female.

The impossibility of non-living things mating has nothing to do with evolution, which applies to living things only.

You need to go take a class on this -- you have some serious misconceptions.

Answer 8

A car is A man made thing just like that god thing. A car is neither male nor female, they can't have sex...if they could there would be A website for it

let me know if you find one, girl on girl just doesn't do it like it used to

Answer 9

:)

I too am skeptical of Evolution.

--
There is no evidence that proves Atheistic MacroEvolution (without Intelligent Design)...

I used to believe in Evolution. However, over a period of time I have grown skeptical of the claims of Macro*Evolution... this is largely due to the weakness of the evidence for Macro*Evolution, and the fact that the evidence, rationally interpreted does not support the overarching claims made by Macro*Evolutionists...

For scientific and intellectual critiques of evolution, see http://www.godsci.org/gsi/apol/evo/00.html .

Is Evolution a FACT? See http://www.godsci.org/gsi/apol/evo/evofaq2.html for relevant discussion.

Cordially,
John

Answer 10

I think you have something just tad bit mixed up there, clever to approach it that way. to stir up controversy but heres the real deal. We are man we create objects, we cannot create a male or female with our hands. Only with our "sexual organs", but the question you should be asking CAN "MAN" make a life? We are apart of it maybe, can we in charge of it? If you know the answer to my last question over there, you will know your answer.

Answer 11

Have you ever read The origin of Species by process of Natural Selection by Charles Darwin? If not, I recommend it. Clearly you do not understand evolution.