a question for an evolutionist?

Question

if you are an evolutionist, please answer this question: how is evolution possible if everything developed gradually? let me clarify: aren't the reproductive, digestive, respiratory, and other organ systems VITAL to the continuing of life? if the "early organisms" had no reproduction capabilities, how did we come to be here? If the "early organisms" had no digestive systems, how did they have energy and fuel to "evolve" in the first place? no rude answers please, i want to know how you ardent evolutionists get around this question, and i promise i mean no rudeness myself. --:-)mutual goodwill(-:--

Answer 1

1) No such thing as an evolutionist.
2) Wrong section.
3) Look it up.

Answer 2

What you seem to be asking is "where did the first cell come from". There are several theories. Here is one.

Evolution theory says the first cells developed from self-replicating molecules. These self-replicating molecules only need a method of preserving their chemical structure, and the ones with the best chemical structures and methods of self-replication won out over lesser ones. So, the principle of natural selection guaranteed that over time increasingly stable and complex molecules would form and eventually become simple prokaryotic cells that are little more than genetic material, cytoplasm, a cell membrane and wall. Remember that the ingredients that make up humans are fairly common elements in the world, so it's not a stretch to say that inorganic molecules became organic molecules, and eventually cells in the past. Some famous experiments have been successful in producing self-replicating molecules that exhibit qualities found in cells.

There is an interesting discussion of this at the web site sourced below.

Answer 3

No Christian has yet to explain away my evolution defense based on Crocodile fossils rationally? They ran from my question on the subject.


There are 110 million year old fossils of crocodiles. There are not fossils of horses, house cats, cows, or any of thousands of species from that long ago age. If the creationists are to be taken as correct there should be fossils of all species dating to 110 million years ago. Else, the God of the Old Testament is without viable continuity of purpose and reason.
The only truthful argument against this theory is that the God of the Old Testament created even the fossils in place. Would this be to confound humans and cause strife in their midst? However, there is another pertinent question to be asked on the above defense. Why would this God also create living crocodiles of a line that still exist nearly unchanged? None of the large dinosaur of fossil fame exists.
I know that those of the Bible accept, and, in some cases cherish parables. Why can they not accept that the Genesis Creation is a parable for consumption of a people much less learned and advanced than those of today?

Answer 4

You may refer to me as a scientist.

Reproduction is the hallmark of life. Reproduction can occur without dedicated systems. The systems just make it more efficient. Life began, by definition, when the ability to reproduce was acquired.

Now in order to reproduce, the did need organic matter and energy. Both of these can be obtained by diffusion of chemicals. In the early environment there was no competition for abundant resources. As life spread, the ability to gather more materials became important.

Larger creatures required the ability to move nutrients and later to move air when diffusion became insufficient for larger growth.

The complex organisms need their systems, but simpler organisms without those system lived, and many leave today.

You breached your "mutual goodwill" with the phrase "ardent evolutionists".

Answer 5

You ask that we not be rude, but your question demonstrates such astonishing stupidity that it's difficult not to be. If this is really of any interest at all to you, go to any library and take out a basic biology text (you obviously never had biology in school). The answers are all there and have been for many decades. You live in a world in which everything you see and touch is the result of science: everything in the supermarket, the light switch you turn on at home, the Internet, your iPod, etc. And yet you sit there clinging to your benighted belief that science is just something silly somebody made up whereas your Bible is real. You people are unbelievable.

Answer 6

There were and still ARE various types of organisms both complex and simple that reproduce without organs. Cellular division, parthenogenesis, etc. All of them allow reproduction without 'organs' of sex. This is also true of digestive, respiratory and other systems. Plants do not have 'digestive systems', yet they turn sunlight and water into energy. There are various types of bacteria that do not need oxygen or respiration of any kind to flourish. They are called 'anaerobic' bacteria.

All of these things are pretty basic and are covered in any good high-school level biology textbook.

Answer 7

Professor Adjineri is incorrect again. (he's extremely a guy!) you do not must have a medical reason for something formerly you should use it. If it quite works, you should use it. The birds did no longer have a idea of flight, yet they flew. women human beings did not comprehend what made cleansing soap do what it does (many nevertheless do not), yet they were given their clothing sparkling besides. it quite is the version between a discovery and an invention. Darwin stumbled on what the animals and plant life were doing with the help of time. He did not invent the phenomenon, he in basic terms defined it in a way that made extra experience than those who wrote formerly, which include Lamarck.

Answer 8

To our type of life? Yes. To a bacteria? Nope. It's developed as necessary.

Example - a single-celled organism can evolve in the lab into being light-sensative, like a single light-sensative resistor. Now it can tell day from night, is better equiped to escape predators, and passes along that ability to any offspring. And thus the evolution of the eye begins.

Answer 9

others have nailed the basics. As far as gradual...

I'll assume you understand genetic recessives? Yes? If not, look it up before you read further.

Imagine that I'm a mutant and I lived 10,000 years ago;I have an eye on the back of my head. This could be an advantage in hunting, but it could be a turn-off ot potential mates. But if it is such an asset that I hunt three times as many mastadonts as the next best hunter, I'll still have my choice of cavewomen.

But my third eye is recessive; my kids don't have the extra eye, but they do carry the genes for them.

A few generations later (say, 3-24), two of my desendents are carrying this gene and mate. Their kids are the first three-eyes in quite a while. Maybe they become great hunters, or maybe the don't. But soon other three-eyes are being born; within a century or two there are one or two born every decade (If my genes have spread out over a decent size population).

Now my three-eyed descendents could become dominant, out-competing their two-eyed kin and eventurally other tribes... or the two-eyes can see us three-eyes as a threat, and use their numbers as an advantage to wipe out three-eyes and try to stamp us out of the gene pool. Long after the threat is forgotten, the cutural tradition could arise that any sporadic three-eyes that are born are immediately put to death. As the gene pool of people with that gene have been weeded down, these births are few and far between.

As society changes to an agricultural society, three eyes may no longer bring the advantages that it did to hunters. Three-eyed babies could continue to be killed, treated as freaks or even as living demi-gods or devils. They could be hunted further, or they could be accepted as with an odd or even exotic appeal (unusual, like a blonde in most parts of the world).

Either way, mutations don't crop up every day, and most do not become assets to reproduction. It takes time for genetic mutations to spread over a population, and time for a mutation to "prove" its merits as an advantage in order to become dominant; if my hypothetical mutation were accepted as an advantage by that society then all the cavepeople would want to have three-eyed people for spouses.

Answer 10

Biological evolution is the change in a population or species' inherited traits from generation to generation. These traits are encoded as genes that are copied and passed on to offspring during reproduction. Mutations and other random changes in these genes can produce new or altered traits, resulting in differences (variation) between organisms. Evolution occurs when these differences become more common or rare in a population. This happens randomly through genetic drift, and based on the reproductive value of traits through natural selection.

Natural selection occurs because organisms with traits that help them survive and reproduce tend to have more offspring. In doing so, they will pass more copies of their inheritable traits on to the next generation. This tends to cause advantageous traits to become more common in each generation, while disadvantageous ones become rarer.

Over time, this process can result in varied adaptations to environmental conditions. As differences in and between populations accumulate, species may split into new species. The similarities between organisms suggest that all known species are descended from a single ancestral species through this process of gradual divergence.......


Ok, I'll post the link, but I'm pretty SURE you won't read it.

Answer 11

have you hear of amebas? there are plenty of unicellular creatures that lack all the organs that you just named and still exist. Life started with this kind of creatures which evolved to multicellular creatures, and developed organs in order to optimize certain process. You should put more attention on your science class, and I'm not trying to be rude, this is really basic stuff.