Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,194,195 members, 7,953,704 topics. Date: Friday, 20 September 2024 at 12:01 AM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / A Little Question To The Atheist (2536 Views)
How Can The Atheist Me Be Happily Married To My Christian Wife? See My REPLY / The Atheist's Prayer / Is The Atheist's Mind Free Enough To Question Atheism? (2) (3) (4)
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by DoctorAlien(m): 11:18pm On Sep 15, 2017 |
If only 1 egg cell is present for fertilization, then the output of the system must necessarily be 1 in number(i.e. 1 sperm cell + 1 egg cell = 1 zygote). Now, if we calculate the efficiency using numbers only, the system appears inefficient in that 500 million sperm cells were put in to get only one human being. But that is just like saying the process of planting maize is inefficient, since you may put in 15 seeds and get one plant. What if we factor in their complexities? If the complexity of a mature sperm cell can be quantified, and termed X, you can imagine the magnitude of the complexity of a mature human being in terms of multiples of X. Factor that in and see if the system is still inefficient. I say, therefore, that doing away with 500 million mature sperm cells to get one mature human being(composed of tens of trillions of cells) is not wasteful at all. Sorry the answer is coming in fragments. That's the best I can do for now. 1 Like |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by DoctorAlien(m): 11:58pm On Sep 15, 2017 |
Bottom line is this: The human reproductive system is so inefficient that we eject 500,000,000 sperm cells to compete for 1 egg. If this was designed, it is the most underwhelming piece of engineering ever conceived. Such a designer, especially if marketed as omnipotent and omniscient, deserves not praise, but ridicule! This statement seems to be ignorant of the fact that of the 500 million sperm cells released, only a handful get to the fallopian tube. The acidity of the vagina(which protects it from potential infections) kills many of the sperm cells, others get lost in the female reproductive tract. Others still are killed by the WBCs in the uterus which see the sperm cells as invaders. When the lucky ones locate the fallopian tube, they are first capacitated(in the isthmus) and then begin to make their way to the ampulla. Then again, in the ampulla, they must survive long enough to meet an egg. Can only one sperm beat all the odds to fertilize the egg? Can 10 million, for that matter? 1 Like |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by shadeyinka(m): 9:59am On Sep 16, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:It looks inefficient except if it was a design to filter off weak sperm cells especially if mutation is inevitable. But shouldn't we also look at the Padlock and Key Phenomenon? The fact that a padlock which is different from a key perform a useful desirable function should indicate a design. Look at the Biological Tool for conception and tell me design is not a inclusive. How many sperms are needed for conception? One or two. If there was no sexual activity, what benefit is the 300million minus one sperms. From the definition of waste (in this sense), we can determine efficiency/inefficiency. |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by AgentOfAllah: 10:10am On Sep 16, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:First of all, it is disingenuous to quote me out of context. For full disclosure, here's what I wrote in context: AgentOfAllah:Now, in its proper context, you will see that what is implied is that any designed process must be evaluated based on the function it promises to serve. If you believe sperms are purposefully designed, then you must also define the purpose for which they have been so designed. For all intents, this purpose is to fertilise eggs. So, the fact that 499,999,999 sperm cells will die out of 500,000,000 without fulfilling their promise is a functional observation not a whimsical opinion. For you to prove my evaluation wrong, you must show that the dead sperms served some purpose that necessitated their existence in the first place. The potential of each sperm cell to fertilize the egg does not bear in calculating the efficiency of the system.What do you think is the definition of efficiency? Your definition of the true efficiency, E, as "the number of successfully fertilized eggs/number of ejected sperms" is a funny play of words. Okay, let's do it like this:Jeez! This is ridiculous! Are you serious?? You have several conceptual problems here, my friend. First of all, a sperm does not contribute a single cell to the developing zygote, nor does it contribute energetically to the process of cell division. All of this energy comes from the mother's yolk sac; an attached enclosure of nutrients. So, the 37 trillion cells have nothing to do with the sperm. Now, back to efficiency. Efficiency is defined as the useful work per quantity of energy. The useful work of a sperm ends the moment fertilisation is over. At that point, that sperm ceases to exist. As such, the efficiency here, let's call it ejaculation efficiency, is a measure of how many sperms perform useful work, compared to how many sperms were ejected to perform that work. Clearly then, our efficiency is a function of: (1) The act of fertilisation (useful work), and (2) Number of ejected sperms (each being a quantum of energy). DoctorAlien:You don't understand the meaning of efficiency. Please read my response to your preceding comment. DoctorAlien:This is diversionary, and does not change anything. Allow me to paint the picture for you again: We are to understand that this system was wholly designed and executed by an infinitely brilliant creator. It speaks to the competency of this creator, that humans, with their limited intelligence, have been able to develop systems that can discriminate between, and sort different types of sperm cells, with > 85% efficiency, yet this supposedly brilliant entity is unable to create the female reproductive tract to discriminate between useful sperm cells and hostile cells. Can you imagine that? Human brilliance is ripe enough to enable us preferentially select zygote gender, meanwhile, an infinitely brilliant creator has to compensate for poor design by forcing the testes to manufacture 100's of millions more cells than is actually required per fertilisation event. 3 Likes |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by DoctorAlien(m): 1:02pm On Sep 16, 2017 |
AgentOfAllah, A sperm contributes the haploid number of chromosomes to the zygote. Indeed, the 500 million sperm cells in question can be seen as 500 million sets of the haploid number of chromosomes. Contrary to your claim, the 37 trillion cells have everything to do with the sperm. Without the sperm cell contributing its haploid number of chromosomes, the 37 trillion cells won't be. Arguing along the same line, the key word here is "mature". Mature, man. We did away with 500 million cells which have undergone full development(and can no longer develop further) to get what? A single cell(zygote). What if we allow the single cell(zygote) undergo full development? We have 37 trillion cells. Very efficient, man. 1 Like |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by DoctorAlien(m): 1:32pm On Sep 16, 2017 |
AgentOfAllah, The sperm technically does not "cease to exist", as its haploid number of chromosomes(which is its functional essence) can be found in the zygote. I disagree with your claim that the useful work of a sperm cell ends immediately fertilization is over. Indeed, fertilization is simply fusing two sets of the haploid number of chromosomes(one from the sperm and one from the egg) to form a diploid number of chromosomes(zygote). The haploid number of chromosomes which the sperm cell contributes to the zygote continues to do "useful work" in participating in the process of replication. I say, therefore, that a sperm cell exists for the chromosomes contained in its head to replicate in union with the chromosomes of an egg cell. The work continues till we have 37 trillion cells. |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by AgentOfAllah: 2:50pm On Sep 16, 2017 |
DoctorAlien: So, I imagine it's these chromosomes that power the evolution of the zygote, abi? DoctorAlien: Abeg komot dia! I prefer to stick with the biological definition of a sperm, not this your nyama-nyama redefinition that seeks to misattribute energy from other phenomena to an all-powerful sperm cell. I will only accept your redefinition on 2 conditions: (1) You have to accept that it is applicable to only you. (2) You also have to accept that half of your brain is sperm cells. |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by gabe: 3:14pm On Sep 16, 2017 |
Reproduction is actually one of the strong points of evolution. You can trace the increase in complexity of reproductive systems from lower organisms to higher ones with similarities shown in their processes. Irreducible complexity, as exemplified by you describing perfect ovaries in the human female, has been debunked over and over again. 2 Likes |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by Narldon: 11:09pm On Sep 19, 2017 |
Seun: Seun I would like to discuss something with you. Quote me when you see this |
Re: A Little Question To The Atheist by Hier(m): 4:02pm On Sep 25, 2017 |
Narldon:Loooooool, I bend if he quote you |
GRAPHIC VIDEO: TB Joshua Heals Man With Permanent Erection!!! / Which Jesus Do You Believe (concerning Atonement)? / Correcting Freeze's Heretic Assertion That "Jesus Drank Alcohol"
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 55 |