User Panel
Posted: 2/20/2016 7:00:54 PM EDT
you get 50% of your genes from one parent and the other 50% from the other parent. wouldn't we have asexual reproduction for a more perfect evolution?
|
|
Quoted:
you get 50% of your genes from one parent and the other 50% from the other parent. wouldn't we have asexual reproduction for a more perfect evolution? View Quote Google meiosis. |
|
If evolution is true then how did sexual reproduction START in the first place
|
|
|
|
I predict this thread will be rational, thoughtful, and not degenerate into personal attacks.
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
If evolution is true then how did sexual reproduction START in the first place oh boy... No, tell me. How did we get from amoeba-like single called life, to multicellular creatures that are male and female and produce sexually. Be sure to use actual examples and not "well it could have" |
|
View Quote |
|
View Quote In on the inevitable shitstorm |
|
Quoted:
How long is one of God's days? When did one of God's days become one of our days? |
|
Quoted:
How long is one of God's days? i have really always disliked that question |
|
|
All we need is that dude who posts Jack Chick tracts to join in on this thread and the circle will be complete.
|
|
hey just be glad that humans don't use traumatic insemination. shit's fucked up.
|
|
Quoted:
When did one of God's days become one of our days? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
How long is one of God's days? When did one of God's days become one of our days? However many it takes for 6400 years to equal several billion. |
|
If anyone is actually interested in reading about this, I'd recommend "The Selfish Gene" by Dawkins. It was written long before he became militant, so it's not preachy and it's pretty accessible.
Of course if you just want to sling shit around and not bother reading anything, who am I to stop you? |
|
|
|
Genetic reason: Better to be able to have access to additional genetic traits through selective breeding then monotrait division which would limit an organism/species from adaptation.
Social reason: 2 Parents being able to care for their offspring mean an increased chance of generational survival to reproductive age. Between the two you would have evolution choosing for sexual reproduction, not against. |
|
Quoted: No, tell me. How did we get from amoeba-like single called life, to multicellular creatures that are male and female and produce sexually. Be sure to use actual examples and not "well it could have" View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If evolution is true then how did sexual reproduction START in the first place oh boy... No, tell me. How did we get from amoeba-like single called life, to multicellular creatures that are male and female and produce sexually. Be sure to use actual examples and not "well it could have" |
|
|
|
The future of sex was shown in the movie Cocoon. You just sit across from each other in a swimming pool and think gene pool.
|
|
Quoted:
you get 50% of your genes from one parent and the other 50% from the other parent. wouldn't we have asexual reproduction for a more perfect evolution? View Quote Because evolution is false and God just likes to watch people fuck (dumb trolling question gets a dumb trolling answer) |
|
This is off topic but I know a guy that doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed. Says that fossils have always been fakes. Any real giant bones found were actually those of giant prehistoric humans. And they had giant guns. I am not joking.
|
|
|
Quoted:
This is off topic but I know a guy that doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed. Says that fossils have always been fakes. Any real giant bones found were actually those of giant prehistoric humans. And they had giant guns. I am not joking. View Quote I know of a guy that thinks knows there are dinosaurs still roaming around Afrika. |
|
Because evolution doesn't have an agenda.
Also, many organisms--to include some animals--DO reproduce asexually. Humans did not evolve that way. The largest advantage of our ancestors was their social nature, and therefore it would be advantageous (and thus would better ensure survival) to have two parents producing offspring for whom they cared until they were mature. |
|
Quoted: A mutation affects one individual at a time Sexual reproduction requires two individuals For a mutation to convert a species or population from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction would be far too big of a jump View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Genticing mutations. Look at lemurs A mutation affects one individual at a time Sexual reproduction requires two individuals For a mutation to convert a species or population from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction would be far too big of a jump Some of them can reproduce "sexually" by sharing packets of genes, or asexually, and often switch back and forth depending on the donditions. Hell, there are even some multi-cellular organisms that do this. Sharing genes has been around a long, long time. |
|
Quoted: I hope this one grows legs. I love seeing a good evolution thread evolving and flourishing. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: I predict this thread will be rational, thoughtful, and not degenerate into personal attacks. I hope this one grows legs. I love seeing a good evolution thread evolving and flourishing. |
|
I remember when people took pride in their trolling
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
This is off topic but I know a guy that doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed. Says that fossils have always been fakes. Any real giant bones found were actually those of giant prehistoric humans. And they had giant guns. I am not joking. View Quote What a dumbass. As we all know, dinosaurs are still alive and well in Africa. mdk89 has seen them when he was doing missionary work. |
|
Quoted:
I know of a guy that thinks knows there are dinosaurs still roaming around Afrika. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
This is off topic but I know a guy that doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed. Says that fossils have always been fakes. Any real giant bones found were actually those of giant prehistoric humans. And they had giant guns. I am not joking. I know of a guy that thinks knows there are dinosaurs still roaming around Afrika. He's not entirely wrong, take a look at the Crocs |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.