All women in the world had their hymen torn before they ever gave birth to their first child. All the women in the world, without a single exception, were born to mothers who no longer have their hymen. Yet, we never heard of a mutation caused by womens' loss of their hymen. We never heard of a new "strain" of women who are born without a hymen. Single rare and random cases - yes. But, as a permanent mutation - no.
If "evolution" is right, this change in the body started "millions of years ago", ever since the first woman appeared in the world. For animals with hymens, this change started even earlier than for humans. So, why didn't females "evolve" into females without hymens?
Isn't that sufficient and convincing factual evidence to prove that "evolution theories" are nonsense?
2007-10-13 15:20:57 · 8 answers · asked by brandlet 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Your premise is tragically flawed from the start. The hymen has a purpose, and that purpose ENDS at birth. All the hymen does is act as a protective barrier for the female reproductive tract during fetal development. The amnion is comprised of a lot of things, including the fetus' own urine, which can be caustic to the developing ovaries, fallopian tubes, and uterus. To minimize the amount of fluid, the hymen forms to partially cover the vaginal opening.
So, sorry charlie, try again for another supposedly brilliant way to try and debunk evolution (hasn't happened yet, because the data supports it!)
2007-10-13 15:40:48 · answer #1 · answered by jade_calliope 3 · 12⤊ 1⤋
there is not any thanks to inform. Even someone who's knowledgeable is inaccurate as oftentimes as top. How a lady walks could inform you that she is uncomfortable. it gained't inform you no matter if she has a rash down there or if she purely broke somewhat of epidermis. Horse back driving or strenuous exercising may reason a hymen to break. so why could you want to understand.
2016-10-09 04:34:31 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LOL, you obviously have no clue what evolution is
...and no, brilliant as it is, your theory is not sufficient/convincing enough to prove wrong the countless scientists who have worked on this over the last century and a half.
Try learning about evolution from somewhere other than your church or your religious websites. Maybe wikipedia?
2007-10-13 21:55:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Because the breakage of hymen poses no advantage to those who have it broken, so therefore there is no push to evolve into a being that doesn't have one. That's like saying just because someone's mother had a broken arm during their pregnancy, the child should also have a broken arm.
2007-10-13 15:25:47 · answer #4 · answered by ajfrederick9867 4 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Thanks for the daybrightener!!! I needed a good laugh. That's almost as Lamarkian as asking why Jewish and Moslem boys are born with a foreskin! After all, for 3000 or so years, the adults have had it wacked off (and NO that's not meant to be a pun)
BTW - your question WAS meant as a joke, right? 'Cause if not, wow, dude! Time to get a good fifth or sixth grade bio text to read.
2007-10-15 07:30:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is sufficient evidence that you do not understand the first thing about evolutionary processes. What you have proposed smacks of " Lamarkism ", a long refuted concept. Refuted by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.
Bad try.
2007-10-13 15:25:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
That's Lamarck's idea of acquired characteristics being passed on. This idea was disproved a long time ago and is not a part of any modern explanation of evolution.
2007-10-13 15:27:47 · answer #7 · answered by ecolink 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Hahaha. I normally just ignore these posts or report them to keep the Biology section somewhat clean.
But this has to be the most novel argument I've ever heard and I can't resist answering. If it's a joke it's brilliant, if it's not, I'll leave it to the sharks.
2007-10-13 15:28:50 · answer #8 · answered by yutgoyun 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋