Questions For Evolutionists.

[Woodznutz]

Never mind reproduction. How was mankind even able to survive before Darwin?

 

[Donald H]

Transvestite sex in the animal kingdom.

11 Animals That Can Change Their Sex

Whether it's a natural process or a necessary adaptation due to the climate crisis, these non-binary animals are fascinating.

www.treehugger.com

11 animals that were created by Satan.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Transvestite sex in the animal kingdom.

11 Animals That Can Change Their Sex

Whether it's a natural process or a necessary adaptation due to the climate crisis, these non-binary animals are fascinating.

www.treehugger.com

11 animals that were created by Satan.

Where do those animals buy their clothing?

 

[ActionJackson]

it works only for single cells, to include the cells of a more complex organism. can you imagine the division of a cat? i'm not sure either 1/2 of even schroedinger's would survive.

So when a single celled organism became a multi-celled organism (I'm assuming in billions and billions and billions of years) how did the multi-celled organism reproduce? And if it was able to reproduce using "fission" then why the need to evolve sexual organs?

 

[rampart]

So when a single celled organism became a multi-celled organism (I'm assuming in billions and billions and billions of years) how did the multi-celled organism reproduce? And if it was able to reproduce using "fission" then why the need to evolve sexual organs?

seneral million generations of colonial organisms between amobae and first multicell animal.

oh, go ask your mother.

 

[Votto]

Simple organisms don’t have sexes

At least not until they are married.

 

[ActionJackson]

seneral million generations of colonial organisms between amobae and first multicell animal.

Were all of these various organism new species with their own, unique attributes?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Simple organisms don’t have sexes

Which explains how progressives think we don't have them.

 

[ActionJackson]

Simple organisms don’t have sexes

Why did they eventually need to evolve sexual organs, then?

 

[rightwinger]

Why did they eventually need to evolve sexual organs, then?

Evolution

More complex organisms evolve from simpler ones

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Were all of these various organism new species with their own, unique attributes?

The simplest of organisms grew by cell cloning. That advanced into some of those organisms implanting DNA into other organisms, which is considered the earliest form of "sex".
This advanced into organisms that are believed to have been more successful by DNA implanting than cloning... a monumental advancement in life. That then advanced into more organized organisms where some specialized in being implanted, and others to implant. We know those organisms existed. We just don't know how they got from cloning to implanting DNA, we just know it occurred.
And - interestingly enough - that is exactly what humans do. Males implant specialized organisms that carry DNA into the female, who has her own specialized organism - an egg - that has her own DNA in it - and whalaaah!! Biology!

 

[ActionJackson]

The simplest of organisms grew by cell cloning. That advanced into some of those organisms implanting DNA into other organisms, which is considered the earliest form of "sex".
This advanced into organisms that are believed to have been more successful by DNA implanting than cloning... a monumental advancement in life. That then advanced into more organized organisms where some specialized in being implanted, and others to implant. We know those organisms existed. We just don't know how they got from cloning to implanting DNA, we just know it occurred.
And - interestingly enough - that is exactly what humans do. Males implant specialized organisms that carry DNA into the female, who has her own specialized organism - an egg - that has her own DNA in it - and whalaaah!! Biology!

And yet all of the above were able to produce generations of their own kind without the need for sexual organs. So why were sexual organs needed at all?

Also, I'm assuming that during the above process, new species that differed from one another were on the rise? Did all of these different species evolve sexual organs simultaneously? Or did a single life form develop sexual organs and the various species develop after the fact?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

And yet all of the above were able to produce generations of their own kind without the need for sexual organs. So why were sexual organs needed at all?

Also, I'm assuming that during the above process, new species that differed from one another were on the rise? Did all of these different species evolve sexual organs simultaneously? Or did a single life form develop sexual organs and the various species develop after the fact?

Cell cloning was how it was done at first. And it was very successful. But it couldn't evolve, change. It could only produce a copy, and a copy and a copy.
So think about it, an organism that can reproduce through DNA doesn't produce a copy. Because of the enormous complexities of DNA - it literally creates a new being.
Now.. as that species faces new challenges, the DNA can and does adapt to that change. That is a massive advantage over cell cloning. So eventually nearly all forms of life were taken over by those that reproduce by the exchange of DNA.

 

[badger2]

Again ... no legitimate answers to the simple questions.

Nevertheless, the sloth referred to has substance in this argument.

 

[Crepitus]

Two simple questions for Religious Evolutionists:

1) How did the earliest organisms reproduce before they evolved sexual organs?

2) If the earliest organisms were able to reproduce without sexual organs, then why was there a need for them (sexual organs) to evolve in the first place?

The very first chapter of the Bible openly discusses the two sexes matter-of-factly. It not only discusses that two sexes existed from the beginning but discusses the purpose of sexual relations between a man (he) and a woman (she).

I'm not religious at all, I do not need an invisible sky being to protect me from reality.

But The reason is biodiversity.

The earliest organisms reproduced by mitosis, Just like modern day republicans,

 

[ReinyDays]

Two simple questions for Religious Evolutionists:

1) How did the earliest organisms reproduce before they evolved sexual organs?

2) If the earliest organisms were able to reproduce without sexual organs, then why was there a need for them (sexual organs) to evolve in the first place?

The very first chapter of the Bible openly discusses the two sexes matter-of-factly. It not only discusses that two sexes existed from the beginning but discusses the purpose of sexual relations between a man (he) and a woman (she).

1) Exactly the same way they do today ... does your skin heal itself by creating sex organs? ... of course not ... health skin cells just simply divide and replace the dead and dying skin cells ...

Did you not know cells divide? ... and the new cells almost always have a complete set of DNA ...

2) Why sex evolved is a matter of debate ... it certainly spreads beneficial traits around the population quicker ... it also allows for a surplus of males to feed the predators ... black widow females eat the male after sex ... the list of benefits goes on ...

The lifecycle of ferns is interesting ... is this what you're protecting? ...

 

[ActionJackson]

1) Exactly the same way they do today ... does your skin heal itself by creating sex organs? ... of course not ... health skin cells just simply divide and replace the dead and dying skin cells ...

Did you not know cells divide? ... and the new cells almost always have a complete set of DNA ...

2) Why sex evolved is a matter of debate ... it certainly spreads beneficial traits around the population quicker ... it also allows for a surplus of males to feed the predators ... black widow females eat the male after sex ... the list of benefits goes on ...

The lifecycle of ferns is interesting ... is this what you're protecting? ...

All well and good but if life forms existed for billions of years without sex organs and the need for sexual reproduction then it makes no sense to evolve sexual organs as a means for survival.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

All well and good but if life forms existed for billions of years without sex organs and the need for sexual reproduction then it makes no sense to evolve sexual organs as a means for survival.

The earth was changing friend.
Species that can only multiply by cloning can't change. And if the changes that are occurring is detrimental to their survival, then that organism will not be successful.
Over the course of a few billion years Earth completely changed. Everything about it. Temperature, the atmosphere, liquids, an entire array of chemical changes. Species that could multiply via DNA exchange had the ability to adapt to those changes.
Take oxygen. Early forms of life on earth did not need oxygen, in fact it was poison to them. As earth's atmosphere became more oxygenated - every single one of these species died. But the species that could evolve did not. They adapted to the oxygen and thrived.
Sex is just a word to describe DNA exchange. And DNA as a source of reproduction is superior to cloning in a changing world.

 

[Blues Man]

Two simple questions for Religious Evolutionists:

1) How did the earliest organisms reproduce before they evolved sexual organs?

2) If the earliest organisms were able to reproduce without sexual organs, then why was there a need for them (sexual organs) to evolve in the first place?

The very first chapter of the Bible openly discusses the two sexes matter-of-factly. It not only discusses that two sexes existed from the beginning but discusses the purpose of sexual relations between a man (he) and a woman (she).

I learned about asexual mitosis in 8th grade

Mitosis - Definition, Stages, Function and Purpose | Biology Dictionary

Mitosis is the step in the cell cycle that the newly duplicated DNA is separated, and two new cells are formed. This process is important in single-celled eukaryotes, as it is the process of asexual reproduction.

biologydictionary.net

 

[rightwinger]

All well and good but if life forms existed for billions of years without sex organs and the need for sexual reproduction then it makes no sense to evolve sexual organs as a means for survival.

Does God have a Penis?