Non religious evolutionists, please will you give me a serious answer to this Question?

Question

I am not convinced by the evolution theory, there are too many "ifs", "buts", "assumptions" and too many variations in the length of times when things were supposed to have taken place.

My question for a serious answer is:

If we originally started as (or became) a single celled, one gender amoeba like creature, whose reproductive system was an efficient splitting of the cell. Why today do we have a less efficient system involving two genders and in human terms a lengthy wait for results, coupled with an often painful experience?

Also could you explain how two genders have evolved alongside each other, whilst being compatible with each other?

Answer 1

Well you are right to be skeptical of evolution as it contradicts five laws of science and the so called fossil proofs e.g pitdown man turned out to be fakes. Leaving that aside, my belief is that God created us male and female. As to the compatibility I am not sure how far many married couples like myself would agree with it! Just kidding. Again., the Bible tells us that men and women are compatible as woman was a perfect helpmate for man.

Answer 2

GREAT question man!! A really, really though one.

1)Sex = genetic variation. The cell spliting you talk about leads to zero genetic variation. Genetic variation is good because it makes a population far far more resistant to changes in the enviroment it lives in.
The evolutive origin of sex on the other hand is a mistery. Its a BIG hole in evolution (its funny how i never heard a creationist mentioning this before and i, an evolutionist have to mention it). That is so because if you observe only 1 generation you have a 50% loss on your genetic material by making children with sex instead of assexuate reproduction! Well, natural selection ONLY sees in shor term! You either live and reproduce NOW or you die NOW. You can't turn to natural selection and say :"i know this character sucks, still in a million years it will be great, please spare it untill then!!" It dosen't work this way.

2)The origin of the genders are better understood throughout evolution. Check out my source for an explanation (can't give it to you now, sorry)

As a Christian and an Evolutionist i was very very happy to see such a good question regarding evolution. If half of the creationists here on R&S asked questions as good as these all evolutionists and naturalists would have a though time awnsering it.

Paz de Cristo

Answer 3

The human being is a complex organism biologically and mentally also. As such we require a complex system of birth and care for the first few years when we are helpless.

The two genders have two distinct roles if we go by nature - where each one of us have a defined role - a mother is more attached to a child as she bears it, nourishes it and cares for it. The male is supposed to go for hunting and organize shelter and foods. The current civilization is in a very premature state with more divisions in terms of religion, national boundaries, commerce etc. which puts us in constant conflict.

The human body physically had evolved somewhat - while mentally we will take another million years to evolve properly in a true society devoid of any boundaries and live with our head held high.

Sometimes I feel that if the Chimp was allowed to grow and naturally evolve - then the story would be different. Sometimes it seems there was some form of divine/extra terrestrial intervention in the evolution process and hence the anomaly and the gap.

This a good subject but requires more space than yahoo answers to discuss :)

Answer 4

Survival has determined an efficient system where offspring and mothers are often protected by the often stronger opposite gender.
Painful childbirth, after a relatively short gestation in terms of lifespan, is a payback for the child developing to a size where survival is more than likely.( a sure sign of evolution )
Two genders have evolved as any physical weakness would be possibly negative in just one.
Each step in evolution can be explained when we accept chance, we can see this accelerated when man interferes ie selective breeding.
Can religion explain pre history which is not mentioned in most Holy Books

Answer 5

The position of evolution is that beings must evolve physically as well as fundamentally within their environment without the need for supernatural interference. The position of creation is that the absolute perfect principle of life (God) creates downward from perfection into lower and lower states of imperfection. The confusion is when you look at it realistically. We know that a human progresses from a baby to a child to an adult, he doesn't descend from an adult into a child then baby. To clarify the truth on this matter, it must be understood that the smallest essence of reality is actually equal to the highest, so that from the absolute reality there comes the simple organism of life, which eventually evolves into a higher being that will contemplate this order. In this way, both views are held correctly, the progression through time of evolution, and the logical assumption that imperfect things must proceed from the perfect.

The problem then, is proving that the smallest is equal to the largest, which is counter-intuitive. But relatively you can explain it in this manner: smaller than the quantum, is the same as larger than the cosmic. That is not to say that the quantum = cosmic, but rather, that which is smaller than the quantum is equal to that which is larger than the cosmic. You will interject at this point and say that nothing is smaller than the quantum, and also that nothing is larger than the cosmic, so that that is true, these equal the same thing in your mind: nothing. But it is not absolutely nothing, since there is a middle ground of things, between quantum and cosmic, that prevents it from being nothing. So this thing, which is not truly an objective thing, nor is it truly nothing, is actually the hidden essence of reality, the principle of life.

Answer 6

Not being a scientist, I can't explain it all. The best explanation I ever heard of why sexual reproduction might evolve is for the advantage of genetic diversity. If an organism reproduces through asexual means, then the offspring is basically a clone of the parent. Sexual reproduction shuffles the deck, so to speak, and allows helpful mutations to occur.

If the two genders were to diverge to the point where they were not compatible with one another, that would be the end of that particular species, so it stands to reason that they would remain compatible with one another throughout the process.

Answer 7

Actually sexual reproduction is a better method to ensure survival. Asexual reproduction pretty much just creates a clone of the mother. When the right illness comes along it would wipe out the entire population. sexual reproduction allows the genes to be mixed up so there is no build up of weaknesses in the the general population.

Think of what inbreeding does to a healthy population of people in a reletively few gererations. You just keep passing the same genes around and never get anything new.

Answer 8

well we have come along way from our single celled selves so things such as reproduction are going to be more complicated. might be nice and simple if we could just split and there would be another human but that isn't logical now is it. I'm no expert on all this stuff, need to ask a biologist really but it is all a lot more logical than the alternative theory

Answer 9

Evolutionists is a bad word because it attempts to subscribe a belief structure to those who currently favor a certain theory.

What theory is superior to evolution, if there are too many "ifs" for you?

Sexual reproduction is not less efficient, it is in fact an evolutionary advancement. Already in your body there is lots of asexual reproduction going on, so we have not lost those advantages, burned skin will regenerate through asexual reproduction,

Sexual reproduction allows recombining of DNA, which allows communities of organisms with longer life spans and where the offspring are more widely dispersed to enjoy the benefits of faster adaptive change.

In Asexual reproduction, two different strains of organism may have developed two different good adaptive features, because they were in two different environments. For example one strain may have developed resistance to a particular type of parasite, because it was exposed to that for several generations, and another may have adapted resistance to environmental heat or radiation, because of exposure to that for several generations.

With asexual reproduction, They would never be able to combine these benefits, in a future generation, but with sexual reproudction, they could eventually produce offspring with both beneficial characteristics.

Answer 10

The human body is a hell of a lot more complex then an amoeba...it would obviously take more then splitting in half to make more...You have a bowl of jello, you can easily split and share that...You have a piece of pie, if you try to split it in half there's a good chance all the insides will fall out and the crust will crumble, you need to either cut another whole piece, or make another pie...see what I mean?

Answer 11

by the splitting of cells, mitosis and myosis. single celled organisms reproduce in the same way sperm and eggs do once they combine, in an embreo.
Disruptive
selection selects against the average, pushing a population into two
different (but both selected for) types, like male and female, each with
its own average. Sexual ambiguity may be selected against. Individuals who
do not send clear "I am male"or "I am female" signals to potential mates
may be less likely to achieve reproductive success and, as a result, the
genetic factors which lead to those conditions may become reduced in future
generations of the population