Quote:
Originally Posted by Allan_L
Hi Chris,
Gradual evolution seems a poor explanation here, since until they were used, having those separately developing organs would not provide any advantage for a mutation strain. Would they? And to work they must rely on mutual development of both (m+f) organs in the same time frame, wouldn't they.
|
Allan. You are using the old "what use is half an eye?" argument that seems powerful....until it is carefully examined. In relation to eyes, imperfect eyes are always better than no eyes. In relation to sexual reproduction, what is important is transfer of DNA by combining half from each parent. This can be achieve in all sorts of ways without sexual organs. While I am not sure of the exact answer, bear with me and I will do some research and I am sure I can answer the question, anless one of the good folks here already knows!
In realtion to "rubbishing those who report inconsistencies" , scientists will ALWAYS welcome inconsistencies because that opens up new areas of research. What annoys scientists is those who say, "here's an inconsistency, therefore evolution is wrong the the Bible is right" and then purport to be acting scientifically. An inconsistency does NOT mean evolution is wrong, anly that we haven't figured out all the answers yet!