Question to us:
“How does evolution account for the existence of male and female forms among species?”
Mary Jo’s Response: For the sexes to arise by evolution, both male and female and all their complex complementary reproductive parts would have needed to “evolve” by random, chance natural processes in the same kind of organism at the same time and same location, or natural selection would not have “saved” these wonderfully miraculous accidental mutations as they would not provide functional advantage until both sexes were up and operating. That would require myriads of “lucky” mutations, and even then, would have needed to evolve multiple times across various evolutionary lines. That involves way too much faith in time, chance, and natural processes. The Biblical explanation of one man/one woman created by God takes much less faith in my opinion. It fits the facts of known, observable science and has been seen in cultures all over the globe for all recorded history. By the way, this also explains the origin of male and female in animals and plants – and the many diverse and complex specialized systems seen in them.”
I suggest you check out the following articles:
Quote from the article:
Through fertilization, new combinations of genes continually arise so that many variants come into existence, and only those, according to the evolutionary view, who fit the environment best survive. However, this process is excluded from any upward trend in the line of descent, because no essentially new information arises as a result of the recombinations occurring in sexual reproduction. Through all their countless recombination efforts, all breeders of plants and animals have provided proof that even the most highly bred cows remain cows, and that sunflowers never grow from wheat.
Sexual reproduction is only possible when both sexes have fully functional reproductive organs at the same time.
Sexual reproduction is only possible when both sexes have fully functional reproductive organs at the same time. By definition (see assumption E8), an evolutionary process is not directed by some purposeful strategic plan. How is it then possible that such different and complex organs, which fit one another in every morphological and physiological detail, could have evolved suddenly? Furthermore, we must bear in mind—as Kaplan concedes—that “the profusion of ways and means is enormous and the sophistication of the tricks the sexes employ to come together, is often astoundingly marvelous; their study is one of the most interesting fields in biology.” The question arises why Rensch still believes that “no wise Creator was necessary for their origin”
Thanks for your question. It shows you are thinking! I wish more students would ask thoughtful questions. If they did, more would come to the conclusion that evolution doesn’t hold up scientifically and the Bible makes more sense – not only in the issue of origins, but also in the issues of life here on earth and in eternity.