What do you think of the virgin birth of Jesus ?

[Debater Slayer]

How to be selected if not evolved first ? random mutation first and the lucky ones will pass.

Read about evolution if you want to expand your knowledge about it. It seems to me that you are just repeating misconceptions about it on religious grounds instead of trying to understand it.

 

[FearGod]

Read about evolution if you want to expand your knowledge about it. It seems to me that you are just repeating misconceptions about it on religious grounds instead of trying to understand it.

Don't you agree that mutations is a random process and should occur first in order for natural selection and evolution to work ?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Don't you agree that mutations is a random process and should occur first in order for natural selection and evolution to work ?

Yes, mutation is random. What's wrong with that?

 

[FearGod]

Yes, mutation is random. What's wrong with that?

It means rubbish, how you respect science while accepting that our complex bodies and intelligence were just due to random mutations through long period of time.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It means rubbish, how you respect science while accepting that our complex bodies and intelligence were just due to random mutations through long period of time.

Because the evidence points to that. If there were no scientific evidence suggesting that we were the result of evolution, I wouldn't believe it. There is a lot of evidence to support evolution, however.

 

[FearGod]

Because the evidence points to that. If there were no scientific evidence suggesting that we were the result of evolution, I wouldn't believe it. There is a lot of evidence to support evolution, however.

At the beginning of life there were no genders and reproduction were asexual, can you explain according to the evidences when and at which point males and females evolved ?

 

[Debater Slayer]

At the beginning of life there were no genders and reproduction were asexual, can you explain according to the evidences when and at which point males and females evolved ?

A magical power created life and there was suddenly life on Earth, male and female.

There. Does that make you happy? We all know magic is the answer, right?

 

[FearGod]

A magical power created life and there was suddenly life on Earth, male and female.

There. Does that make you happy? We all know magic is the answer, right?

No magic, but a plan and design.

 

[viole]

It means rubbish, how you respect science while accepting that our complex bodies and intelligence were just due to random mutations through long period of time.

Well, at least it explains why we look like apes.

The alternative would be that God is so fond of the ape body, for some reason, that He decided to create the Universe, together with its zillion galaxies, so that beings looking like monkeys (in His image, apparently) could exist in a remote part of it.

I don't know you, but if I intended to create such magnificence, I would not make the pinnacle of my creation look like a hairless gorilla. Would you?

And we are supposed to respect and take that seriously, right?

Ciao

- viole

 

[FearGod]

Well, at least it explains why we look like apes.

The alternative would be that God is so fond of the ape body, for some reason, that He decided to create the Universe, together with its zillion galaxies, so that beings looking like monkeys (in His image, apparently) could exist in a remote part of it.

I don't know you, but if I intended to create such magnificence, I would not make the pinnacle of my creation look like a hairless gorilla. Would you?

And we are supposed to respect and take that seriously, right?

Ciao

- viole

It make sense.

 

[viole]

It make sense.

It does. Doesn't it? Nose, mouth, ears, hands, legs, arms, etc, and postures are very similar. All you have to do is to remove the hair.

For sure we look much different than spiders or birds, for instance.

Why not make us much more different than any of them, in your opinion?

Ciao

- viole

 

[dust1n]

And how a bacteria evolved to males and females with their own distinctive sex organs ?

Lots of bacteria produces sexually without ever needing anything resembling an organ.

Yes true, a lot of complex wiring.

Yup. Lots to learn.

 

[FearGod]

Lots of bacteria produces sexually without ever needing anything resembling an organ.
.

And do bacterias have genders.

 

[paarsurrey]

Aupmanyav said: ↑
Well, for example, myself. My mother was a virgin when she married my father. Am I not born of a woman who was a virgin?

Paarsurrey wrote:↑
Well in that sense everybody is born of a virgin.
I agree with you.

Aupmanyav said: ↑
Well, for example, myself. My mother was a virgin when she married my father. Am I not born of a woman who was a virgin?

Paarsurrey wrote:↑
In ancient times in many cultures people used to have many wives; some of them they married for the first times i.e., they were virgins while other's husband had died and they married such ladies, if they had children from such wives, these could not have been called from the virgins.

I further have to add.
Abdullah got married to a Aminah a virgin (not previously married to anybody). Muhammad was born of Abullah and Aminah.
The prophecy most suitably is fulfilled on Muhammad than anybody else, I think.
What does one think? Please.

Regards

 

[dust1n]

And do bacterias have genders.

I have to correct myself here. I was wrong, apparently one of the dividing lines between prokaryotes (bacteria) and eukaryotes (basically everything else) is that bacteria does not sexually reproduce, so I was wrong. So to answer your question, no, bacteria doesn't have genders. How every, there are microscopic multi-cellular protista that do.

"Sexual reproduction is the primary method of reproduction for the vast majority of macroscopic organisms, including almost all eukaryotes (which includes animals and plants).[1]Prokaryotes reproduce through asexual reproduction but may display processes similar to sexual reproduction (mechanisms for lateral gene transfer such as bacterial conjugation, transformation and transduction), but they do not lead to reproduction."

And

"The first fossilized evidence of sexual reproduction in eukaryotes is from the Stenian period, about 1 to 1.2 billion years ago."

Also:

""Multicellular filaments from the ca. 1200-Ma Hunting Formation (Somerset Island, arctic Canada) are identified as bangiacean red algae on the basis of diagnostic cell-division patterns. As the oldest taxonomically resolved eukaryote on record Bangiomorpha pubescens n. gen. n. sp. provides a key datum point for constraining protistan phylogeny. Combined with an increasingly resolved record of other Proterozoic eukaryotes, these fossils mark the onset of a major protistan radiation near the Mesoproterozoic/Neoproterozoic boundary.

Differential spore/gamete formation shows Bangiomorpha pubescens to have been sexually reproducing, the oldest reported occurrence in the fossil record. Sex was critical for the subsequent success of eukaryotes, not so much for the advantages of genetic recombination, but because it allowed for complex multicellularity. The selective advantages of complex multicellularity are considered sufficient for it to have arisen immediately following the appearance of sexual reproduction. As such, the most reliable proxy for the first appearance of sex will be the first stratigraphic occurrence of complex multicellularity."

Bangiomorpha pubescens n. gen., n. sp.: implications for the evolution of sex, multicellularity, and the Mesoproterozoic/Neoproterozoic radiation of eukaryotes

 

[dust1n]

It means rubbish, how you respect science while accepting that our complex bodies and intelligence were just due to random mutations through long period of time.

Random mutations have been observed. Wasn't hasn't actually ever been observed is there being no random mutations to DNA when it's replicated.

Why would I think that random mutations would ever stop in any particular direction?

 

[Godobeyer]

have to correct myself here. I was wrong, apparently one of the dividing lines between prokaryotes (bacteria) and eukaryotes (basically everything else) is that bacteria does not sexually reproduce, so I was wrong. So to answer your question, no, bacteria doesn't have genders. How every, there are microscopic multi-cellular protista that do.

is not bacteria origin of life , so IF the bacteria no sexually reproduce and genders, so who make the plan and desing the sexually reproduce and genders ?

 

[dust1n]

is not bacteria origin of life , so IF the bacteria no sexually reproduce and genders, so who make the plan and desing the sexually reproduce and genders ?

Well, we can just go ahead and assume God did it, since anything difficult gets attributed to God, despite the fact that we couldn't know any more about this as can look into a billion year old window in the past to witness the very first microscopic organism sharing DNA in a way that we would call sexual reproduction because there is no evidence for this either.

Or we can just keep looking at all the available data that is about and keep coming up with theories and testing those theories.

No one knows exactly how sexual reproduction started.

 

[Bunyip]

We don't know what is God's nature and how and why is always existing, so the answer is i don't know what God is or what is he made of.

Then what is the point of all this nonsense about building blocks if you don't even have any idea how the builder came to be?

 

[FearGod]

Then what is the point of all this nonsense about building blocks if you don't even have any idea how the builder came to be?

The building blocks means there was a builder, not knowing or seeing him, won't change the fact.