1 2 3 4
Perhaps a total misunderstanding of evolution is the real reason behind why so many are against it.
8/31/2010 1:27:55 PM
Because evolution TRIES to optimize, but rarely succeeds. It typically has to settle for "good enough". That said, sexual reproduction actually has the advantage over asexual reproduction in that it allows for far greater genetic variance.
Here's what I want to know: why did your brilliant genius God not think of that? Why didn't HE optimize the situation like that?
8/31/2010 1:32:13 PM
reads like a little kid who found proof evolution isn't real.
quite simply, asexual reproduction provides little in the way of genetic variation, which can lead to a species becoming extinct, because it cannot adapt, or just evolving very slowly, because there is no genetic variation.
there are some species who reproduce asexually, but i don't think any of them are complex species. the most complex i believe would be a worm. each successive generation is actually a clone of the previous generation. think about what that does to a species' ability to change as a whole.
8/31/2010 1:38:26 PM
This just might be the stupidest, most ignorant, argument against evolution that I have ever read.
8/31/2010 1:46:36 PM
But I don't want to give birth D:
8/31/2010 1:48:55 PM
Mammals don't work that way. Besides, if guys could give birth, they'd have to have pms and menopause and stuff. I do not know a single man who wishes for these things.
I do know a few transgender people though and that's kind of a different story.
Edit: Wait, I thought Jesus happened /after/ creation happened...Did he create the universe retroactively or what?
8/31/2010 2:22:21 PM
Bdelloid rotifers - haven't had sex for 25 million years...
Leopard Slugs - When two leopard slugs want to reproduce. they hang upside down from a thread of mucus, extrude their enormous penises from their heads, and entwine their penises in a long spiral. After they both ejaculate, they both turn up pregnant... Deal with it.
Better stil, watch it... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhVi4Z6CjZk
8/31/2010 2:26:07 PM
If you think cat is tofu, then explain purple cactus pterodactyl sprocket.
8/31/2010 2:39:32 PM
Yup, we all know you are ignorant when it comes to biology, but must you tell us of your ignorant superstitions as well?
8/31/2010 3:07:42 PM
Gender is learned, sex is determined at birth. That's only the first in a whole post of fail.
8/31/2010 4:06:53 PM
Many species faced extinction so why didn't they evolved to have male species to give birth?
THE MAN IS NOT A SEPARATE SPECIES FROM THE WOMAN. IF THIS WERE THE CASE, THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BREED. BECAUSE THEY'D BE SEPARATE SPECIES.
Yeah, I know I'm focusing on the wrong thing here, but I honestly think my brain has passed its stupid quota for the day. Like, just when you think they couldn't get worse, they do. The mind boggles.
EDIT: Ooh, a new level of fail:
Really, it is sad for someone to ignore the creator Jesus Christ.
Dear commenter: please reread this Bible you profess to believe in. I know Jesus Christ is God, but God as God the father is completely different from God as Jesus Christ.
Short version: Jesus. Was. Not. In. Genesis.
8/31/2010 4:12:22 PM
Teleology is FAIL, damn it.
Theology fail here too, possibly--I guess the commutative property when applied to a tripartite deity implies that each part is responsible for the activities of each of the others, but odd.
Vocabulary fail, too, since gender is social and not directly to do with whether one can breed.
8/31/2010 4:29:40 PM
Do not pass go, do not collect $200. Just go to your local community college and take a simple Biology 101 class, you'll get your answer in the first week.
My FSM, I swear they think they are so smart with these attempts to do a "gotcha" question, only to ask a question a that high schooler would know the answer.
8/31/2010 5:12:04 PM
Yeah, this is pretty much the worst argument for creationism.
8/31/2010 7:36:13 PM
I... wait... what the shit?
8/31/2010 7:38:09 PM
I'm usually not the facepalm type, but...well...
You people...it's almost like you are trying to piss off anyone who has an high school knowledge of biology.
8/31/2010 9:36:31 PM
because it's been happening for as long as organisms gained the ability to breed, and it's worked out pretty damn well so far.....so why would it need to change?
9/1/2010 12:07:58 AM
It's a bit like asking why only dogs can bark.
There is an interesting question in there (how come two sexes appeared), but it's phrased so badly that it is really just asking why a certain tautology is true.
Basically female and male designate two different reproductive strategies. The former is investing heavily in a few offspring, the latter is investing little in individual offspring but trying to maximize its number. It's only normal that out of this configuration the female would come out as the birthing sex. It's the exceptions that are far more interesting:
But I guess it is too much asked for this person to think about this.
9/1/2010 1:13:48 AM
"(I know this, and I'm not a biologist. I'm a bloody programmer. I was awake in the biology classes and can use Wikipedia, dammit. Why can't you?)"
Lol, I feel the exact same way when I explain stuff about biology to people, and especially about the Wikipedia thing when I explain pretty much anything else to people. But yeah, the fact that I was awake in biology class makes me feel pretty pro when it comes to this sort of thing. I can't imagine what it must be like to be ignorant of what goes on in the reproduction process.
9/1/2010 5:37:44 PM
I thought Jesus was the SON of god?
Therefore Jesus did not create the world.
9/1/2010 6:25:25 PM
1. If Evolution is true, then why only females can give birth?
Your Argument Fails, Exhibit A: There are simpler creatures (bacteria, fungi, lower plants, protozoans, etc.) that can reproduce asexually, i.e. without sexual intercourse. That also means that they don't have genders. So the whole premise of your argument falls flat anyway.
2. Female mammals give birth. They say species pass on genes to ensure the survival of their kind ... If both can give birth, then genes are passed to a faster rate and it could also improve the survival rate of the species.
Your Argument Fails, Exhibit B: The downfall of producing asexually is that no genetic variation arises from that. The less genetic variation within a species/population/what-have-you, the less the chance of survival. Why? Because if some pathogen or other change comes along that doesn't favour a particular trait, and everyone has that trait, then they're all going down; but if there are a bunch of different traits in the population, then only a few are going down. More variation means more chances that at least a few individuals will have the traits necessary for survival.
9/1/2010 7:35:55 PM
3. Many species faced extinction so why didn't they evolved to have male species to give birth?
But this will never happen because God designed only a female can give birth!! (Genesis chapter)
Your Argument Fails, Exhibit C: Evolution doesn't work with a goal or a grand design in mind. It can't be like, "Oh, this species is going extinct, maybe I should give them the ability to reproduce asexually." Evolution can only act on traits that already exist. The only way a complex species could "evolve" asexual reproduction would be if some sort of mutation made this possible; and such a mutation, or string of mutations, would be extremely unlikely to occur; there are many mechanisms that drive asexual reproduction, which complex organisms do not have.
It would take a very precise mutation, or a very precise string of mutations, to make a complex organism capable of asexual reproduction. It's so unlikely that, as a matter of fact, if complex species were able to asexually reproduce, that would point more towards an intelligent designer than to natural selection.
What I love about these "if evolution is real, then why can't we...?" arguments is that they often present situations that would be more likely under an intelligent designer anyway. They don't realize just how squarely they are shooting themselves in the foot.
9/1/2010 7:38:31 PM
David F Mayer
Flunked high school Biology, I see. Oh well, there are plenty of ignorant fools in the same condition.
9/1/2010 7:47:50 PM
Am I the only one who watched Godzilla?
He could totally do it. He did it with a building.
9/5/2010 3:38:29 PM
Eggs, parthenogenesis, asexual reproduction..........which biology class did you miss?
9/7/2010 9:43:25 AM
1 2 3 4