Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
07-04-2003, 05:53 AM | #21 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Morris, MN
Posts: 3,341
|
Quote:
|
|
07-04-2003, 06:02 AM | #22 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 5,393
|
Quote:
Genitals are no more mysterious than eyes or other organs, and their existence is, lucky for us, not just fun, but adaptive. The ability to share and exchange genetic material provides an advantage over organisms that can't screw, because it allows variations and exchanges not possible without a mate. Sexual reproduction is not anywhere near "100%"; most copulation is inefficient and fails to produce viable off-spring, a good sign that the design was not intelligent, but merely adaptive. |
|
07-04-2003, 06:09 AM | #23 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
|
Quote:
And so the additions keep rolling in... Oolon |
|
07-04-2003, 06:17 AM | #24 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Norfolk, VA, USA
Posts: 219
|
Quote:
|
|
07-04-2003, 06:29 AM | #25 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Selva Oscura
Posts: 4,120
|
Quote:
|
|
07-04-2003, 06:37 AM | #26 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the land of two boys and no sleep.
Posts: 9,890
|
Quote:
When these questions are answered, what role is left for the "god of the gaps"? Therefore, rather than assigning god to the job, we admit we do not know at present and continue to seek answers. |
|
07-06-2003, 07:20 AM | #27 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,261
|
Ha ha! l-bow posted his "argument" (I use the term loosely) at
July 2, 2003 07:16 AM. Then at July 2, 2003 07:56 AM, he posted, Quote:
scigirl |
|
07-16-2003, 03:15 AM | #28 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 215
|
Here's what that guy said when a posted a reply. Actually it was a thread in t.o I posted a link to.
*******************************begin quote Two things I got out of this thread... 1) There's serious posters and there's "god bashers" just like there are here. I don't know why. I assumed there would be a rational discussion there. It was a little more informed than this one, but it still had its share of people who didn't put their brain in gear before then engaged their mouths. Just like in here. 2) Interesting theory concerning the hermaphrodites and earthworms. The problem I have with it? Survival of the Fittest. The Evolutionist's mantra. IF this is all about the Survival of the Fittest, then the worms that lost their "maleness" would no longer be the fittest. Obviously those worms that could give AND receive DNA information would be the ones with the edge. So why is it that the one that was NOT the fittest suddenly is the norm for all of higher biology? It totally goes against the whole backbone of evolution. Hermaphrodites should be the norm, because they have the advantage. Nice theory, Darwin, but I don't buy it. "Male and female, He created them." ************************** end quote So, what advantage does separate males and females have over hermaphrodites? |
07-16-2003, 03:34 AM | #29 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
|
No need to carry two sets of reproductive organs, for starters.
Also, specialization of roles. Males can fertilize many females, so fewer are needed: the rest are "expendable" and can become defenders of the females and young (epitomized in our own tradition of "women and children first" in disasters). Females can specialize the other way, in cautious behavior. Also, I presume there's a danger of self-fertilization in hermaphrodites. Male/female is less incestuous and makes good mixing of genes more likely. |
07-16-2003, 06:21 AM | #30 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: State College, PA, USA
Posts: 39
|
Quote:
If resources are plentiful, then you can afford to be both a mom and a dad. But if resources are limited, it makes sense to dump one of those roles and focus all your attention on just being one sex. If you're just a mom, you can put more energy into developing offspring, thus increasing the chances that your offspring will make it. If you're just a dad, you can afford to make a ton of pollen and spread it all over the place, and that makes it more likely that you'll have offspring. I hope this makes sense. I guess I should go introduce myself in the coffeehouse! I've been lurking for a while now, but haven't posted because I haven't able to add anything yet! Lemna |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|