Replies

As far as genders are concerned, their development is being studied, and there are several approaches that have merit (I'm not an evolutionary biologist, so I my understanding is rudimentary). However, right in your own backyard there are a number of species that are capable of self fertilization - a lot of plants (most conifers) are diaceous, i.e. have male and female reproductive organs. Many animals are simultaneous hermaphrodites (worms, snails, clams), and some fish are sequentially hermaphroditic, and change gender during their lives.

Worms are still worms

Plants are still plants

Fish are still fish.

Can evolutionist account for the new information (read DNA) required to move a “simple” life form to a more complex one ?

no doubt someone will come up with the math behind it someday but when you start with DNA you need an error edit correction process ~ which, in fact, DNA has ~ it works at the time of meiosis in the higher organisms. That's what drives gender differentiation ~ Tab A vs. Slot B

It's gotta' be one whale of an error correction mechanism since, in general, DNA based life has been around for about 4 billion years on this planet ~ and it didn't turn into some other kind of life in all that time.

However, right in your own backyard there are a number of species that are capable of self fertilization - a lot of plants (most conifers) are diaceous, i.e. have male and female reproductive organs.

Right, but why? The energy-cost of making these sexual organs themselves, WITH NO REASONABLE GUARANTEE OF WORKING (and even likelihood of failing), is the question. Asexual reproduction is "the safe bet" and, since evolution is a process, there's not any reason to implement it: that is, evolution cannot 'see' that added effort/complexity* now yields some benefit in the future. (*Something that is 'optional' won't be used in the first rounds of evolution and should fall victim to degenerating ["vestigalization"?], and an entire system [sexual reproduction] is of no use if it doesn't fully work.)

Many animals are simultaneous hermaphrodites (worms, snails, clams), and some fish are sequentially hermaphroditic, and change gender during their lives.

Except self-fertilizers it's irrelevant to the discussion: in order for sexual reproduction to work it has to be multiple members having sex. -- Thus energy is wasted on sexual-organs, from a evolutionary-standpoint, if there are not other sexed organisms of that species to mate with: at that point it actually becomes true that sexual organs should be the ones selected against.