Theistic Evolution

[spuriousmonkey]

if you want to be a scientist or think scientifically you have to be flexible. the essence of sexual reproduction is exchange of genetic information. I really don't give a shit about terminology. Once you start doing that you become a teacher instead of a scientist.

now what if we momentarily forget everything out textbooks say and start thinking by ourselves. What if this exchange of genetic information is not a secondary form of reproduction. What if the primary form of reproduction was not asexual but this limited sexual form. Or what if they evolved together? Is it also not simple to imagine then that this limited echange of information might have lead to a totally commited form of sexual reprodcution? Is it so difficult to imagine that the current forms of reproduction have evolved from each other through evolution?

 

[Bridge]

if you want to be a scientist or think scientifically you have to be flexible.

Apparently the flexibility you're describing doesn't include acknowledging that there are unresolved issues with the TOE.

I really don't give a shit about terminology

Yes, this much is obvious. However, the problem still exists and seeing as you're determined to debate that the TOE has no major obstacles or unresolved issues- you're therefore ignoring a host of definitions surrounding evolution, homology, LUCA, asexual or sexual reproduction and the terminology of the various subcomponents of TOE. This will not lend you much credibility in your arguement.

Once you start doing that you become a teacher instead of a scientist.

A true teacher has no disciples. You learn to think for yourself. As Albert Einstein said, the important thing is not to stop questioning.

now what if we momentarily forget everything our textbooks say and start thinking by ourselves.

Yes, exactly, I did. It took me nearly 20 years to figure out that the TOE isn't the all encompassing theory it was made out to be.

What if this exchange of genetic information is not a secondary form of reproduction. What if the primary form of reproduction was not asexual but this limited sexual form. Or what if they evolved together? Is it also not simple to imagine then that this limited echange of information might have lead to a totally commited form of sexual reprodcution? Is it so difficult to imagine that the current forms of reproduction have evolved from each other through evolution?

It's not difficult to imagine sexual reproduction evolved from asexual reproduction. The problem is science isn't about imagination, it's about empircal evidence. The question isn't about what we know about sexual reproduction today, it's about what we don't know, like how it evolved.

As the Grand Deacon of Evolution, Richard Dawkins stated:

"To say, as I have, that good genes can benefit from the existence of sex whereas bad genes can benefit from its absence, is not the same thing as explaining why sex is there at all. There are many theories of why sex exists, and none of them is knock-down convincing." (Climbing Mount Improbable, page 75)

So, in conclusion, if there is anything you'd like to bring up about the evolution of sexual reproduction that would totally resolve the issue in a scientific manner I'm certainly willing to read it. Otherwise, I'm going to sincerely thank you for the mental exercise and excuse myself from this thread.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

i thought we were going to speculate a bit so that we might reach a new question that is more valuable that the original one, but I see you are not interested.

 

[SwedishFish]

spuriousmonkey, you have amazing patience. i'd have given up long ago. i'd like to see this discussion resolved. i think the problem is lack of basic understanding of evolution mechanisms.

i was reading some papers today because i'm writing a review of a doc's work. they all involve speciation of fruit flies. one of them specifically questions the divergence of two picture-winged drosophila. she found that there was only a slight difference in the amounts of three cuticular pheromones that prevents the two semi-species from mating. sooo...... speciation!

 

[spuriousmonkey]

maybe we should continue somewhere in the biology forum, since we seem to have gotten rid of the religious component in this thread a long time ago.