The question Evolutionsists can't answer

[Intrepid99]

Thread of the year.

 

[Jet Black]

not really. just more ownage of creationists.

 

[ApostateAbe2]

Here's another question that evolutionsists can't answer:

Which evolved first, the left hand or the right hand?

 

[JohnR7]

Here's another question that evolutionsists can't answer:

Which evolved first, the left hand or the right hand?

Are your trying to suggest that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing?

 

[Jet Black]

Are your trying to suggest that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing?

well I did ask once but my left hand wasn't feeling very talkative.

 

[Mistermystery]

Thread of the year.

Where are your pon-pons, or horrible abuse of smilies? I really miss that in responces like that.

 

[MQTA]

Here's another question that evolutionsists can't answer:

Which evolved first, the left hand or the right hand?

I'm a righty and I'm still waiting for my left hand to evolve.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I'm racking my brain to remember the other guy who kept misusing logic and words like irony/parody in the way colossians was. Nathan Poe might remember....

Ikester comes to mind... but it's hard to say.

There have been so many who couldn't understand why we didn't find them as brilliant as they did...

 

[Nathan Poe]

not really. just more ownage of creationists.

Ah, but which evolved first: ownage or pwnage?

 

[WWJND]

Some people....sheesh!!!!

It's clear God wanted us to want to mount everything in sight, so he made [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] feel good. That way it makes it really hard to NOT do those things when we play by his rules. We continue to break the rule, so he gets to be the only one that's perfect, thus, he gets to continue being God. It's like playing tag accept God is on base all the time. Simple stuff really. We learned all of this back in seminary school.

-WWJND

 

[tkster]

And the question is this:

"Which evolved first, sexual [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], or the desire for sexual [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]?"

(Let's watch the evoutionists run round and round and round
and round and ....)

You know, I have to say, after 29 pages, no answer. I like this question . You're right, it's funny to watch.

take care,
tk (http://www.skeptictimes.com/)

 

[Ishmael Borg]

You know, I have to say, after 29 pages, no answer. I like this question . You're right, it's funny to watch.

take care,
tk (http://www.skeptictimes.com/)

Those strange symbols you see on these pages form words, if decoded correctly. You should try it. I saw his question answered a number of times. Maybe you were focusing on those posts with your blind spot- it's an unfortunate consequent of suboptimal design.

 

[lucaspa]

OK, the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] came first. Or rather, the pleasure associated with sex came first. Those individuals that had the first variation such that sex was pleasurable would seek sex out more, or at least not avoid it. Thus, they would have more sex than those to whom sex was painful. Thus, more kids. Which would inherit the variation that sex is pleasurable.

Now, the desire to have sex is not necessarily tied to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Those individuals who seek out sex more often have a better chance of having kids -- more times at bat. Whether or not they feel pleasure from [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

Can you take that onto an extention? How did [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] arrive when they had not seen such a thing before? Everything that has a begining has a cause, what is the cause forthe [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] when organisms were asexually reproducing? It could have been going on forever without a need for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

THere wasn't. And there wasn't [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] among the first sexualy reproducing organisms either. Vertebrate [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] is a very complicated thing depending on hormones, the sexual organs themselves, and chemicals in the brain. The first unicellular organisms to exchange DNA sexually didn't have any of those. It was just that individuals that did this had greater genetic variability in their offspring, making it more likely that one or more of the offspring could cope with the environment.

Sexual organs evolved later.

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] in males is release of sperm. Do fish who simply spray sperm over exposed eggs have [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] in terms of pleasure in the brain? I don't know. But a pleasurable [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] would not be necessary, just the wiring such that when the visual and chemical signals of exposed eggs hits the body, sperm is released.

 

[lucaspa]

You know, I have to say, after 29 pages, no answer. I like this question . You're right, it's funny to watch.

take care,
tk (http://www.skeptictimes.com/)

Fragments is right. There were several proposed answers. I have a question for you:

Do you agree or disagree with the answers? If so, why? If not, why not?

Another question: if people are only supposed to be fruitful and multiply, why would God create either [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] or desire for them? After all, there would be far fewer sins around if sex were simply somthing commanded to be done but which gave no pleasure. Did God set a trap so that people would get in trouble with Him? And what would that say about the god you worship?

 

[DJ_Ghost]

You know, I have to say, after 29 pages, no answer. I like this question . You're right, it's funny to watch.

Not only was post 4 an answer to the question, it was a clear and concise one. More complex answers are scattered around the thread, but they all come to the same conclusion. Now if you don't accept the answer thats one thing, but pretending they are not there is dishonest.

Ghost

 

[Freodin]

Not only was post 4 an answer to the question, it was a clear and concise one. More complex answers are scattered around the thread, but they all come to the same conclusion. Now if you don't accept the answer thats one thing, but pretending they are not there is dishonest.

Ghost

I just found the ultimate proof against God.

I post the question "Why should I believe in God" - put all Christians on ignore, and thus can truthfully say that I did not see any answer to my question.

 

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

Think of it this way: Lesser organisms just live. They don't invent, write, develop unique cultures in the manner that we as humans do. Therefore, one might say, the organisms which do not have sex for pleasure, generally the more ancient species, do not need pleasure because their behaviour is so inherent.

More advanced beings such as humans, dolphins, monkeys, etc. have a lot more intellectual potential. Therefore, as beings of choice, it is also necessary to steer us towards necessities like food and sex with positive incentive.

A species with no desire to reproduce is a short lived one indeed.

 

[Mainframes]

One analogy I like is thus:

If you drink alcohol then it causes a chemical reaction in your brain that brings about various effects such as loss of co-ordination etc.

In the same sense sexual activity in a lot of creatures is governed by a simple chemical reflex. The creature detects the chemical stimulus and by reflex action releases sperm (or ovulates etc), there is no concious effort it is just the way that creature is wired.

Now lets say that a random mutation also causes a release of pleasure when the chemical response occurs then that creature is likely to want to seek out that particular chemical and thus more breeding will occur.

In reality the whole system is more complicated, especially amongst higher order organisms where multiple stimuli are required, but hopefully you get the picture.