Thanks, NaturalBorn, I appreciate the effort. These are all standard creationist claims that (naturally) have been refuted many times. If you want me to recite some of these refutations, let me know. Otherwise, I will merely repeat my appreciation of your effort once more. Oh, just for fun, I will also leave you with the comment that there were early attempts of estimating the age of the earth by figuring out how long all rivers would take to bring the salinity of oceans up on their current levels. Simply calculating the estimated amount of salt on all of the rivers on earth, with no variation, yielded an age in the hundreds of million of years, so you might want to change the premise of your allegation to billions instead of millions
I have a question, which came first male or female? And when they "came together", how long did it take for them to figure out what their sexual organs were for?
Yeah, in patriarchal religions, supported by their fake mysths, men always come first. That's one of the reasons these cults are going out of fashion.
The terms male and female are usually reserved for dimorphic systems such as the XY or ZW system. For other systems, such as those of protozoas, fungi and algae, there are no sexes as such but rather mating types. Some fungi can have thousands of such mating types (literally thousand of sexes). This gives a clue that sexes evolved as a means to ensure compatibility in genetic recombination. So to answer your question, what came first in terms of sexual determination was simple mating-type loci. This seems to have developed into the determination systems that now take up entire chromosomes in both higher plants and animals. This makes no sense.
It gives a clue, but at what point did it happen? When did the sexes of the earliest mammals evolve, and then procreate?
FREEWARE - what is it that threw you off there... You didn't understand "come together" or sexual organs? What didn't make sense? Do you not understand English? Where are you from...? I had a student (high school) read it because you have to realize that this forum and some of you are just comic relief at work because you post such retarded things, and they figured it out and answered the question - so I am just wondering - how old you are to not understand... It's actually funny... It really is... I mean really.... Now do you not "understand" that simple two sentences? HOW?!?!
Ahhhh do we think we are special? Do we think we we are the only ones that read what I write? Athiesm is the fastest growing segment in this country and that is fact. The internet is the reason why. The truth about Evolution, Abiogensis, The Big Bang, etc is now at peoples finger tips. People can stumble upon forums like this and see the debates. Someone can see that I write, 'the proof for evolution is iron-clad' and then go see for themselves. Once they discover the truth about Evolution and not Banana mans BS version, they can see, it conflicts with the bible. As usual BFSmith@764, You cannot see the bigger picture, you can only see what is in front of you. That is why you are a theist and will always be a theist.
I honestly find it hard to see how anyone could say the universe was "designed", since it simply doesn't seem to have the features of something which is. For example, what exactly appears "designed" to anyone about this?> ... an image of how our universe looked (or specifically, of background radiation) 380,000 years or so after the Big Bang? The image above depicts a totally random distribution of energy (out of which matter such as stars & planets etc eventually arose), throughout the early universe - there is no pattern to it whatsoever. There's nothing which appears designed about that at all, or about how the universe (our universe) developed after that... If our universe was designed (either by some sort of deity suspiciously like us, or by other life forms, whichever) then where exactly is the evidence for this... as in, at what point in the development of our universe do people believe there's evidence of some sort of design? Or do people believe this "design" only started taking effect 9 billion years after the universe appeared, when our planet finally formed? Or 4.4 billion years after that when human beings first appeared? In other words, when did this design process supposedly start & where is the evidence for it anyway...?
oo oo I know. The universe is TOO random. The only way it could be that random would be if someone had intended it to be that way.
No, the image is a few years old, but is of the universe as it was over 13 billion years ago (380,00 years or so after the Big Bang). The earth appeared 4.6 billion years ago, and human beings approx 2.4 million years ago. See for example: The detailed, all-sky picture of the infant universe created from seven years of WMAP data. The image reveals 13.7 billion year old temperature fluctuations (shown as color differences) that correspond to the seeds that grew to become the galaxies. The signal from the our Galaxy was subtracted using the multi-frequency data. This image shows a temperature range of ± 200 microKelvin. Source The point being that the temperature fluctuations referred to are totally random, there's absolutely no pattern or apparent "design" to them whatsoever... and it's out of these random radiation/energy fluctuations that stars, planets & all other matter (including us) eventually arose.
Sexes were already present when the first mammal appeared. The systems of sexual determination (resulting in what we call sexes) evolved with methods of sexual recombination. So it doesn't make sense to ask when the sexes of the earliest mammals evolved, Elijah. Sexes were already determined.
I can't find any contradiction in a belief in Intelligent Design and a belief in natural selection. It is clear that the universe is many billions of years old, and the thru natural selection life evolved on the planet Earth the result that humans are the dominant species. What may appear to be random may in fact show a pattern when viewed from a different perspective : distance or time. A belief in an intelligence or system that binds the universe and creates patterns is comforting and makes sense.
By what standard... as for: No such intelligence is necessary and not everything that exist is based on a "patern".
