₦airaland Forum

FreeIgboho:
AI goes through millions of articles like the one you referenced to produce an answer, instead of just one likely biased article

I cant take you seriously if you are just using AI. AI cannot reason in matters like this. It simply throws up what it finds online. If you put in the question differently e.g: what are the problems with the evolution of sexual reproduction - it wil also throw up articles.

I cant waste my time debating ChatGTP. i give my co-discussants enough respect to actually discuss from my mind, and not from AI.

"Sex continues to reign as the ultimate conundrum, the queen of problems, in evolutionary biology. Accounting for its origin in terms of evolutionary rationale is inevitably doomed to failure. As David Tyler recently remarked, “Time and time again, Darwinists fill the gaps in knowledge with their theoretical models, but sooner or later, the next generation of scholars will realise that Darwinists have constructed a virtual world that does not match the real world revealed by research.”

https://evolutionnews.org/2011/07/spinning_fanciful_tales_about_/

Sex, the Queen of Problems in Evolutionary Biology
Jonathan McLatchie

Dr. Jonathan McLatchie holds a Bachelor's degree in Forensic Biology from the University of Strathclyde, a Masters (M.Res) degree in Evolutionary Biology from the University of Glasgow, a second Master's degree in Medical and Molecular Bioscience from Newcastle University, and a PhD in Evolutionary Biology from Newcastle University. Previously, Jonathan was an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Jonathan has been interviewed on podcasts and radio shows including "Unbelievable?" on Premier Christian Radio, and many others. Jonathan has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, South Africa and Asia promoting the evidence of design in nature.

@ FreeIgboho - you are free to examine the credentials of this man and say whether he is childlike in his conclusions.

FreeIgboho:
Are you kidding or what? Your child-like question is "how were they reproducing durring the evolution? The screenshot succinctly answers that

Point to the sentence in your AI scheenshot where it provides the answer thanks.

FreeIgboho:
Are you kidding or what? Your child-like question is "how were they reproducing durring the evolution? The screenshot succinctly answers that

Please just stop pretending. Stop using AI. Get schorlarly and real. Please see this link -

"The origin of sexually reproducing organisms from asexually reproducing ancestors is a profound mystery which has baffled many an evolutionary biologist. The origin and subsequent maintenance of sex and recombination is a phenomenon not easily explained by Darwinian evolution. Indeed, there are several substantive, well-known reasons why the origin of sex presents a serious problem for conventional evolutionary explanations."

https://evolutionnews.org/2011/07/spinning_fanciful_tales_about_/

FreeIgboho:
Please read the below and come back and tell me why your question is not child-like

https://www.nairaland.com/8467293/inexplicable-instincts#135998975

Why are you avoiding my article.

Stop wasting time using AI to send me screenshots of AI answers.

FreeIgboho:
Please read the below and come back and tell me why your question is not child-like

Still doesnt answer my question. Kindly address my question in one conscise sentence instead of pretending to know what you do not.

FreeIgboho:
This is a very child-like question indeed. You are assuming evolution of sexual organs happened sepatate from evolution of organisms. They are all intertwined. Asexual reproduction in simple organisms gradually become sexual reproduction as more complex organisms evolved.
Look, this type of discussion is beyond this forum. I bet you don't have a PhD in evolutionary biology!

You are just being escapist. Stop telling me how childlike the question is. I repeat it for clarity - how was the organism reproducing during the millions of years it required to evolve its sexual reproductive system. Its a very simple and straightforward question. Admit you dont know the answer instead of hiding behind cowardly ad-hominems which I am used to from everyone who this queston is posed to.

As regards the bold, your comprehension skills are really alarming. I am not assuming any such thing. Qute the reverse actually. I am pointing out the exact difficulty in how the organism could have continued in exstence while its reproductive systems were evolving for millions of years.

Please go and read the article I posted - It will show you that this is a real issue even for the most advanced evolutionary biologists. The writers have PHDs in Evolutionary Biology.

Kukutente23:
How is Paul Biya a countryman to Atiku?
And you said you're neutral
Seewahala

It has been widely alleged that he is Camerounian, and frankly its not inconceivable. Some of our Fulani leaders have actually been from Niger Republic or even as farafeid as Mali.

But yes, rumours sometimes can be excessive. Such as the old rumour that Atiku plumbed the backside of a former famous Miss Nigeria in a most unnatural fashion.

FreeIgboho:
Respectfully, these are really child-like questions of someone who knows almost nothing about biology. Asexual reproduction was all there was and there was no male or female. Eventually rudimentary sex organs had to gradually appear as the most efficient way and over time evolve to what we have.
Once again, this type of discussion is not suitable to this type of forum. There are highly specialized forums that have this type of discussion. Otherwise it amounts to a waste of time because people don't know what they're talking about!
Example, Charles Darwin and others have written volumes explaining evolution, but someone reads this vague summary below and runs ti Nairaland to argue evolution!

With every respect you are not just being child-like, I lack the words to describe your inability to comprehend.
Please see the bold.

I ask again, during the process of evolution of the requisite sexual organs, how was the organism reproducing.

Are you suggesting it was reproducing asexually?
I hope not, because that would be the height of absurdity.

I have at all events left other posts for you - including an article by advanced scientists, showing how this is a problem.
Also, if you yourself research a little, you will quickly realize that there is no easy answer to this question and it remains an enigma even in scientific circles.

So please school up.

@FreeIgboho -

As the article above is too long to be posted in entirety without being banned by the spambot, I post the conclusion.

Conclusion

Lewis Thomas, the highly regarded medical doctor who served for many years as the president and chancellor of the prestigious Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in Manhattan, was unable to contain either his enthusiasm or his praise for the system we know as “sexual reproduction.” In his book, The Medusa and the Snail, he wrote about the “miracle” of how one sperm cell forms with one egg cell to produce the cell we know as a zygote, which, nine months later, will become a newborn human being. He concluded:

‘The mere existence of that cell should be one of the greatest astonishments of the earth. People ought to be walking around all day, all through their waking hours, calling to each other in endless wonderment, talking of nothing except that cell.... If anyone does succeed in explaining it, within my lifetime, I will charter a skywriting airplane, maybe a whole fleet of them, and send them aloft to write one great exclamation point after another around the whole sky, until all my money runs out.’[48]

Dr. Thomas’ money is perfectly safe. No one has been able to explain—from an evolutionary viewpoint—the origin of sex, the origin of the incredibly complex meiotic process that makes sex possible, or the intricate development of the embryo (which is itself a marvel of design). At conception, the chromosomes inherited from the sperm are paired with the chromosomes inherited from the egg to give the new organism its full chromosomal complement. Evolutionary theorists ask us to believe that random, chance occurrences brought about this marvelously interdependent process of, first, splitting the genetic information into equal halves, and, second, recombining it through sexual reproduction. Not only is an intricate process required to produce a sperm or egg cell in the first place via meiosis, but another equally intricate mechanism also is required to rejoin the genetic information during fertilization in order to produce the zygote, which will become the embryo, which will become the fetus, which eventually will become the newborn. The idea that all of this “just evolved” is unworthy of consideration or acceptance, especially in light of the evidence now at hand.

The highly complex and intricate manner in which the human body reproduces offspring is not a matter of mere chance or a “lucky role of the dice.” Rather, it is the product of an intelligent Creator. Albert Einstein said it well when he stated: “God does not play dice with the universe.”

http://www.trueorigin.org/sex01.asp

Do make sure to go through the whole article! It is truly worthy reading!

Oh, and here is the RESUME of the writers:

Brad Harrub is a graduate of Kentucky Wesleyan College, where he earned a B.S. degree in biology. He also earned a Ph.D. in neurobiology and anatomy from the College of Medicine at the University of Tennessee in Memphis. He is a member of the Society for Neuroscience, and was listed in the 2001-2002 edition of Who’s Who Among Scientists and Researchers. He was an invited speaker to the 2003 International Conference on Creationism. He currently serves as the Director of Scientific Information at Apologetics Press, and as associate editor of Reason & Revelation.

Bert Thompson is a graduate of Abilene Christian University, where he earned a B.S. degree in biology. He also is a graduate of Texas A&M University, where he earned both M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in microbiology. Dr. Thompson is a former professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine at Texas A&M, where he taught for several years. While at Texas A&M, he served as Coordinator of the Cooperative Education Program in Biomedical Science. Currently, Dr. Thompson is the Executive Director of Apologetics Press and editor of Reason & Revelation.

These gentlemen are Phd holders in Neurobiology and Microbiology.

And they write and ask questions articulated on same posers as mine.

@FreeIgboho -

Evolutionary Theories On Gender
And Sexual Reproduction

© 2003 Brad Harrub, Ph.D. and Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

Abstract

The origin and maintenance of sex and recombination is not easily explained by natural selection. Evolutionary biology is unable to reveal why animals would abandon asexual reproduction in favor of more costly and inefficient sexual reproduction. Exactly how did we arrive at two separate genders-each with its own physiology? If, as evolutionists have argued, there is a materialistic answer for everything, then the question should be answered: Why sex? Is sex the product of a historical accident or the product of an intelligent Creator? The current article reviews some of the current theories for why sexual reproduction exists today. Yet, as these theories valiantly attempt to explain why sex exists now, they do not explain the origin of sex. We suggest that there is no naturalistic explanation that can account for the origin and maintenance of sex.

Introduction

Biology texts illustrate amoebas evolving into intermediate organisms, which then give rise to amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and, eventually, humans. Yet, we never learn exactly when or how independent male and female sexes originated. Somewhere along this evolutionary path, both males and females were required in order to ensure the procreation that was necessary to further the existence of a particular species. But how do evolutionists explain this? When pressed to answer questions such as, “Where did males and females actually come from?,” “What is the evolutionary origin of sex?,” evolutionists become silent. How could nature evolve a female member of a species that produces eggs and is internally equipped to nourish a growing embryo, while at the same time evolving a male member that produces motile sperm cells? And, further, how is it that these gametes (eggs and sperm) conveniently “evolved” so that they each contain half the normal chromosome number of somatic (body) cells? [Somatic cells reproduce via the process of mitosis, which maintains the species’ standard chromosome number; gametes are produced via the process of meiosis, which halves that number. We will have more to say about both processes later.

The evolution of sex (and its accompanying reproductive capability) is not a favorite topic of discussion in most evolutionary circles, because no matter how many theories evolutionists conjure up (and there are several), they still must surmount the enormous hurdle of explaining the origin of the first fully functional female and the first fully functional male necessary to begin the process. In his book, The Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution of Genetics and Sexuality, Graham Bell described the dilemma in the following manner:

‘Sex is the queen of problems in evolutionary biology. Perhaps no other natural phenomenon has aroused so much interest; certainly none has sowed as much confusion. The insights of Darwin and Mendel, which have illuminated so many mysteries, have so far failed to shed more than a dim and wavering light on the central mystery of sexuality, emphasizing its obscurity by its very isolation.’[1]

The same year that Bell released his book, well-known evolutionist Philip Kitcher noted: “Despite some ingenious suggestions by orthodox Darwinians, there is no convincing Darwinian history for the emergence of sexual reproduction.”[2] Evolutionists since have freely admitted that the origin of gender and sexual reproduction still remains one of the most difficult problems in biology (see, for example, Maynard-Smith, 1986, p. 35). In his 2001 book, The Cooperative Gene, evolutionist Mark Ridley wrote (under the chapter title of “The Ultimate Existential Absurdity”):

‘Evolutionary biologists are much teased for their obsession with why sex exists. People like to ask, in an amused way, “isn’t it obvious?” Joking apart, it is far from obvious.... Sex is a puzzle that has not yet been solved; no one knows why it exists.

The full and thorough work is here:

http://www.trueorigin.org/sex01.asp

@ FreeIgboho -

Here is an extract of a post I made year ago questionng the evolution of sexual reproduction -

---------------------------------------------

The reason I think it is a glaring sore thumb, and the genuine source of the controversies: is the fact that these phenomena are in reality completely outside the purview of the principles girding the Theory of Evolution! Natural selection and mutation of the sort advanced by the Theory of Evolution actually have no bearing whatsoever on these phenomena: and that is the real reason that evolutionists struggle in such wild confusion to force these phenomena under the trappings of evolutionary theory even when the principles of evolution have no bearing on them!

For your deep thinking please:

1. Why were the first unicellular organisms (which supposedly arose spontaenously from some pre biotic soup - [proposition not within ToE]) self replicating organisms at all?

2. If they were not self-replicating organisms, what factor led them to evolve the faculties of self replication at all.

3. If they were not self-replicating in nature, after first coming into existence, then they would have died, and the existence of any other such would depend on fresh flukes supposedly in some pre biotic soups.

4. Why is life self replicating at all? What accounts for this?

5. Further down the evolutionary path (and with great astonishing bounds and leaps of faith, I might add), why did se.xual organisms evolve?

6. In the case of se.xual organisms, which sex evolved first - male or female. Or did they evolve simultaenously, and how and why so? What evolutionary impetus drove this process, what caused this to happen at all. Or did females evolve from males only or males from females only or both from sexually neutral organisms?

7. Is it possible for a sexually neutral organism to evolve into two different and complimentary sexes?

8. Taken that separate sexes emerge, what evolutionary impetus drives and informs the aggregation of reproductive se.men in one sex while simultaneously driving the formation of a se.xual reproductive system complete with a womb in the other sex?

9. Further on, what evolutionary impetus would be responsible for the development of the pe.nis and testicles for the male, and simultaneously form the (admittedly eminently fit for purpose) va.gina and womb for the female?

10. What evolutionary process would cause the bodies to evolve such DNA transfer mechanisms as to be able to create the full copy of a complete creature through a se.xual process? What evolutionary impetus leads to this? What evolutionary explanation would there be for the coming to existence of umbilical cords?

11. What evolutionary pressure at the same time as all this also led to the formation of mammary glands (br.easts) for the female only, suitable for the nutrition of new born babies?

12. Where it is explained that men and women have all the foregoing se.xual differences on account of differences in hormones, what evolutionary explanation is there for the difference in hormones in the first place? And with this last question bear in mind that if they were not male and female already, there would be no separate male and female needs to drive such evolution of separate and different hormonal systems ab initio!

A careful dwelling on each of these questions from the standpoint of the holistic supposed process of evolution - and in line with the principles of evolution as taught, is that which you guys need to do: and therewith see with immediate clarity that which I contend, namely that these are phenomena completely outside the purview of any evolutionary principles whatsoever, which is why they do not have any possible evolutionary explanation.

FreeIgboho:
Because the details are too long to be discussed here. You'd have to be ready to spend months reading volumes. Remember these are branches of studies that people spend years specializing in.
So whatever is written here, like this below, necessary has to be a vague summary

You are funny. Perhaps yu didnt understand the queston. That's not unique to you. Almost everyone either fails to understand it or pretends not to understand it. I will try and help by rephrasing it -

- During the millions of years it took for the sexual organs and all their functions to evolve, how were the organisms they belonged to reproducing?

Deal with this first. In doing so think carefully. Remember that each aspect of the sexual reproduction system must have synchronized with its opposite in the other gender. So as sperm was evolving for example, eggs must have been evolving in the other gender. And since this process takes millions of years as is always claimed, how was the organism reproducing during that time?

I will reproduce my other questions in my next post.

PS: THE extracts you posted are way off the mark in addressing this question Waaaaaaaaaayyyyy off the mark - embarrasingly so - whch proves my point about how you people just like to quote any scientific terms that sound good - without thinking carefully.

CoronaVirusPro:
It’s too early to start wailing in 2025.

My kind know that will be your excuse when defeat hits you in 2027.

Say all you want, the train you cannot stop.

ADC should be planning to contest against Seyi Tinubu in 2031, not against His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) in 2027. gods are different from men.

You see BAT as a god?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Kobicove:
If it's true that they have governors coming to join them you guys should hope they're governors of quality states that have deep pockets to fund presidential election cos the 4 richest states of Lagos, Rivers, Delta and perhaps Kano are already out of the equation.

If the governors they are expecting are from 'dead' states whose IGR cannot even pay the salaries of their civil servants then I pity them

Is Kano richer than Akwa-Ibom

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Kukutente23:
When is the next convention since you're smart?

Kukutente is it you who hs been having many of your posts banned and deleted?

TheNiceGuy:
They can even date your brother or sister.

Great write-up but the above will be really some-how oh. I speak with reference to that actually happening, and not as a politcal analogy.

plaetton:
I didn't say that particular instance was evolution.
That's learning and adaptation.

So why did you bring it up. It's not as if any of the examples I listed is adaptation or learned behaviour.
Whats the relevance of what you brought up.

DesChyko:
Peter Obi is a shining example of a politician that conquered greed.

He conquered vulgar ostentation and the crass display of opulence. Not sure about greed.

CoronaVirusPro:
Aregbesola bite the hands that fed him and lost relevance.

As it stands today, even Portable Olalomi commands more followers than he can do. He has now become a political luggage. ADC will tell him at the appropriate time that his relevance is not needed anymore.

He should retrace his steps if he wants to regain his relevance.

So you really think its okay for one man to hold an entire state ransom and dictate its political future forever. To corner its resources and become God to all others. If you say BAT's fingers fed Ogbeni, whose fingers fed BAT, if not all our fingers by virtue of our collective money which he cornered? And is he not biting our fingers now? When will you guys stop this BAT worship?

plaetton:
Thank you.
Evolution does not go straight to the point where a species attains maximum traits for survival.
It meanders in all directions first until unsuitable traits are weeded out and suitable ones are adopted. Once it hits that 1 in billion lottery, it locks it into the genetic memory, and then seeks the next optimum survival traits.

I watch a tube video about certain experiment with forest monkeys.
According the report, if you teach a few monkeys in a selected portion of the forest a new trick that is beneficial to them,for example, a more efficiently way to pluck out and eat a fruit, in about a week time , the monkeys on the other side of forest would all be using the new skill.

That's not evolution.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

FreeIgboho:
See how you dismiss people's life's work. Thoughtless scientists . If you have the time to research you'd find out the nuts and bolts of how it all fits in. It all can be explained by natural selection. Only thing I haven't been able to have it explain is why humans love food that's NOT good for their health.

It's easy to say without giving detail. Too often, people think dropping certain words is a get out of jail free card. So terms like "natural selection", "millions of years" and "quantum physics" are used like this. Quite often people feel once these phrases are used the questions are answered.

Let me give an example. I have queried the evolution of sexual reproduction on this forum with detailed questions several times. Most people like Plaetton, wirinet and yourself are content to just drop the "millions of years" escape card and leave it at that.

What they fail to ever task themselves with is the problem of how the organs of both sexes must have simultaneously evolved to complement one another. And the fact that this could not happen over millions of years because there would be no reproduction during that period if the organs did not already complement one another.

LordReed:
I had doubts that I want to deal with decisively. I wasn't expecting to end up an atheist to be honest. I was expecting truth to win out but I didn't know truth had a different colour from what I was used to.

Something must have happened that day.

Xxxxxxxxx

FreeIgboho:
You simply restated your statement on Jesus so that settles that.

As for natal homing, etc, I told you use internet. See example below

These robotic answers written by thoughtless scientists are not helpful. How, for example, does the answer you sourced explain the behaviour of Salmon on homing journeys?

Kukutente23:
I hope it's not a professor of biology sha. His certificate should be withdrawn if he is. He disgraced the UK. Where has he seen a dead whale exploding

Many carcasses explode from accumulated gases during decomposition.

FreeIgboho:
*Please, what have I said about Jesus you don't consider rational?

All your rigmarole about him being God was terribly irrational.

The first ancestors didn't do the same thing. Very few did.

What is your evidence of this?

FreeIgboho:
Nature supplies vast varieties, then through trial and error the "best" traits survive, which makes it seem that's all there ever was or like it was intentionally so from the beginning

I have told you repeatedly, traits are not specific instructions of what to do at specific life moments such as at birth or at the start of a homing journey for salmon.

Ijoba85:
It set us back but in his time Nigeria is locally refining crude oil

The Dangote Refinery was well on its way to completion before Tinubu came and it is not the doing of Tinubu. If anything we all saw how the Tinubu govt tried to frustrate Dangote. As for the PH Refinery they claimed had come on stream, I hope we can all see that was a lie.

and not wasting money on importation and subsidy anymore.

The removal of subsidy particularly in the sudden and absolute manner it was done was bad. The govt should have focused on eliminating or reducing the staggering corruption in the operation of the subsidy. The govt ought to also have waited till local production of PMS came on stream.

In his time, there's more money for States to pilot their affairs

No there isnt, once you factor inflation.

in his time minimum wage is at 77k,

Which is actually less than the previous minimum wage in terms of what it can buy, given inflation. Also it hasnt been implemented till date in most places.

in his time , students are giving loans for school fees so they don't have any reason to drop out of school

But there was first radical increase in school fees so they have only given with one hand and taken back with another hand.

And the giving is not really a giving because it must be repaid.

But the taking was real.

..... You are just hating for nothing . Go and work if you never chop

You are only making this insensitive statement probably out of tribal sentiment. This government has destroyed the lives of most Nigerians.

helinues:
The policies you are referring to was designed for most especially Africa countries to be accumulating debts, we have seen that and change our strategies hence able to clear off our debt. Kenya can't even borrow any money at the moment

Pls see my edit in bold red above.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

helinues:
But we have cleared our current debt with IMF. So what's wrong with their policies?

Fundamentally the precepts which advocate devaluation of currencies are designed to grant Imperialist societies cheap and easy procurement of value from you which puts such Imperialist societies in a dominant economic position over you. This is made worse once the country devaluing its currency is not a producing industrial power - in which case it could be advantageous. When the country is import dependent it is economic suicide. For the simple reason that it will have to pay more of its local currency for every single thing it needs. This furthers inflation.

Additionally the idea that subsidies are bad for such economies is a very insidious one. Western economies have always survived and been resuscitated at their worst moments by very large injections of subsidies. Go and find out how the USA came out of the Great Depression. Go and find out all the subsidies that are deployed up till today in the first world. And where necessary they do it by the creation of new money. By fiat. But these Imperialist societies will come to poor countries and tell them the lie that subsidies will kill them. In our case, our subsidy was perfectly sustainable but for the massive corruption which came into its operation. The government ought to have targeted that corruption rather than throwing the baby out with the bath water.

These policies taken together are not really different from the Structural Adjustment Program of the 80s. Its just SAP 2.0. Its nothing new. SAP 1.0 failed and this one will fail as well - do you know something? This set of policies have failed in every single third world economy where they have been deployed - bar none. If you can point out one where they ever succeeded, let me know. There is none. It is a recipe for recession, inflation and starvation and it has faithfully delivered all these everywhere it has been implemented.

One thing you need to understand is that no economy can ever grow by drastically reducing the purchasing power of the people and this is what has been done by this govt.

PS: As regards FOREX please dont make the mistake of talking about the fraudulent dual exchange rate. That is a different matter from devaluing currency.

FreeIgboho:
Believe it or not, all these traits can be quite logically explained without involving magic or God. Just search the internet. The only issue is that we have no way of being sure that's how it actually worked. It is equally possible that God gave them those traits

Remember I said in my first response to Plaetton that there is actually a suitable answer but I want to see who puts their finger on it.

This genetic memory answer is not it. I have said it repeatedly that it doesn't answer for why the first ancestors did the same thing.

PS: You tend to sound fairly rational once you are not discussing Jesus.

PlasmaTV:
Even POTUS doesn't travel as much as this.

We thought Buhari would be the last Ajala. But greater than Buhari is here.

Thank you. And this is a disease with Nigerian presidents. As soon as they get the seat, they behave like they have never entered a plane before by traveling every two seconds.

I think only the lecturers (Yaradua and Jonathan) didn't quite behave like this.

jamafa:
How did his selfish ambition set as back to 20yrs?? By removing subsidy bah??

By returning to IMF policies of the 80s which not only failed in Nigeria but have always failed everywhere they have been tried.