1 2
#636455
Smith
Not fundie, he just doesn't understand. And his reasons for not understanding are good reasons, at least opposed to "GENESIS JEEBUS DID IT LOLZ."
8/16/2008 8:07:30 PM
#636456
dpareja
Um, anybody who can't reproduce won't have offspring, and hence the genes that caused their inability to reproduce will leave the gene pool.
Natural selection: learn it.
8/16/2008 8:07:58 PM
#636464
L
I think I can feel my IQ dropping just reading this.
8/16/2008 8:15:07 PM
#636486
Godbuster
"The only possible (non impossible) explanation is that humans evolved as individuals having BOTH male and female organs"
That's actually almost it, men are genetically speaking lesser women.
8/16/2008 8:25:20 PM
#636494
aaa
And the ones born with both sexual organs?
8/16/2008 8:28:29 PM
#636582
John
The only possible (non impossible) explanation is that humans evolved as individuals having BOTH male and female organs.
No, that happened to our non-human ancestors, hundreds of millions of years ago. AFAIK, all vertebrates have separate sexes, although some can reproduce without males.
We all start out as females. Some of us are then transformed into males by the presence of hormones produced from the Y chromosome. Animals have had their sex switched in the laboratory by injecting appropriate hormones. It has to be done at the right stage of fetal development. For humans, it happens around 6-10 weeks. So we don't have to "evolve" separate males and females - just a series of hormones for changing one to the other.
8/16/2008 9:26:09 PM
#636583
Dark_Lord_Prime
"This is one of the reasons I find Evolution to be absurd."
I'll ignore the fact that you actually gave multiple reasons, and concentrate on another fact that will simply blow your little mind:
We are all female for the first several months of pregancy, then one or the other takes dominance.
*watches fundy's mind implode*
[EDIT]
dammit, John beat me to the 'Submit' button! :P
8/16/2008 9:26:19 PM
#636598
pete
The reason that Aztec finds evolution to be absurd is that he/she is an ignorant fool.
8/16/2008 9:38:46 PM
#636611
Allegory for Jesus
"How do evolutionists account for human reproduction?"
Simple. Non-human reproduction. It didn't come from scratch, but built up over time. That's what evolution is all about.
"Evolution requires that males and females co-evolved in perfect harmony"
We are part of the same damn species, so we could ONLY evolve in the same direction as one another, since the sexes are just two slight genetic variations from the same genome.
"The only possible (non impossible) explanation is that humans evolved as individuals having BOTH male and female organs"
Actually, this is true...if you remove the word "human" and realize that our method of sexual reproduction is pretty much identical to every other mammal and was developed outside of the confines of the human species.
"But this is required of ALL animal species."
Exactly, you twit! Humans and the animals we know today ultimately came from the group that originally developed this form of reproduction, and thus it only needed to be developed once (and refined later on). That's what evolution is all about!
8/16/2008 9:54:02 PM
#636625
8/16/2008 10:03:46 PM
#636632
WhyDontYou.Org.UK
It does make me wonder where all the money spent on education goes.....
8/16/2008 10:10:23 PM
#636633
Osiris
Complexity isn't a barrier to evolution, partially because evolution creates complexity. It starts out simple and becomes more complex. By the time human beings evolve sexual reproduction in vertebrae animals had existed for well over 500 million years. In fact I could probably argue that by the time vertebrates evolved sexual reproduction was already viable.
You have to understand that when something evolves, it's modern counterpart doesn't just sporadically appear out of nowhere. It starts out simple and gets more complex. Sexual reproduction indisputably evolved so quickly there's almost no transitional forms of it in the fossil record because only the individuals that could reproduce did reproduce, and thus only their reproductive systems got passed down.
8/16/2008 10:11:15 PM
#636638
Isn't this the same guy that said he had an IQ of 160?
http://fstdt.com/fundies/comments.aspx?q=44896
XD
8/16/2008 10:16:03 PM
#636641
Horsefeathers
"How do evolutionists account for human reproduction?"
Very well I think.
"The human reproductive system is incredibly complex...slight problems/variations in the female body can easily result in the death of the egg/fetus AND the woman."
Yeah, no shit. Not exactly what I'd expect an omnimax deity to come up with. It is, however, exactly what I would expect to see from a completely natural and unguided process.
"Now, add the male to the equation...Evolution requires that males and females co-evolved in perfect harmony...each change in males was matched by a corresponding change in females...or extinction occurs."
I know men and women have their differences but we aren't separate species you know.
"So how can the exact same evolutionary mechanisms (internal and/or external) that cause males to become "more male," simultaneously cause females to become "more female?" (in perfect harmony, mind you)"
What the fuck are you talking about?
"The only possible (non impossible) explanation is that humans evolved as individuals having BOTH male and female organs..."
Not quite, but close.
"and then once reaching full development...slowly "devolved"...a split...one group becoming only female; the other only male (again, in perfect harmony)."
Once again, what the fuck are you talking about?
"But this is required of ALL animal species. There is no plausible answer."
Not when you aren't even sure what the hell your question was to begin with.
"This is one of the reasons I find Evolution to be absurd."
I find your entire post absurd. Please, read a biology book.
8/16/2008 10:18:40 PM
#636662
Eden
No, darling,
individuals with problems in their reproductive organs lack the evolutionary fitness to give their genes to the next generation, therefore these defective genes wouldn´t become part of the gene pool of the tribe/flock of this species.
This is the huge difference between having only one breeding pair or having a whole tribe/horde/flock (or whatever) of the same species. The larger number of individuals you have in a flock/horde/tribe allows for a certain percentage of individuals who are crippled by malicious mutations (affecting their ability to survive or breed in a negative way). The survival of the tribe/flock/horde (or even the whole species) isn´t affected by it as long as this percentage of infertile individuals doesn´t get too high.
The theory of evolution therefore is only absurd for people who are indoctrinated too much by the bible and therefore assume that there is always only a single pair or a single family which starts a whole population (like Adam&Eve or Noach&Family) ;-)
8/16/2008 10:37:15 PM
#636672
Jay-Sus
Translation: Evolution is absurd because I have no understanding of it besides what I copied from Wikipedia and didn't bother to read.
8/16/2008 10:46:49 PM
#636693
alex77
@672657: exact my thought.
8/16/2008 10:58:02 PM
#636716
Old Viking
If Aztec finds evolution absurd that's sure going to be a grievous blow to biology.
8/16/2008 11:12:05 PM
#636729
Headache
Quite frankly, I don't care if you find evolution absurd. Science do not work that way.
Go back to school!
8/16/2008 11:21:52 PM
#636793
anevilmeme
Does Aztec understand that human males and females are the same species?
8/16/2008 11:53:26 PM
#636906
Mister Spak
"How do evolutionists account for human reproduction? "
If your parents didn't have any children due to non-functioning reproductive systems, then you probably won't have any either.
And you think evolution is absurd.
8/17/2008 1:00:32 AM
#636907
One Trick Pony
This guy must think girls are another species.
8/17/2008 1:01:08 AM
#637206
JDC1
Evolution finds Aztec276 to be absurd.
8/17/2008 4:17:27 AM
#637217
Topaz_witch
And Noah collecting all species is far more plausable.
8/17/2008 4:27:43 AM
#637221
Sten
Wow, this guy is really stupid. He either seems to think males and females evolve separately, or that they are two different species. That's some powerful ignorance.
8/17/2008 4:30:32 AM
1 2