Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind
Natural selection could not have "selected" from genderless asexual replication the DNA information necessary for evolving the very first male and female forms necessary for sexual reproduction.

Interesting claim. Can you prove it?

2 posted on 05/18/2018 8:13:33 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (TANSTAAFL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Toddsterpatriot

Interesting when one demands “proof” when their own claims and assertions also have no proof! Evolution as now taught is devoid of proof... it consist solely of various speculations, antidotes and at its root bold proclamations. Evolution can’t prove how the first cell emerged, how DNA happened or how the origin of the sexes occurred. We just know it did!

One of the #RustyIronies in the current “debate” is the evolutionist will admit they don’t know how life began... but with certitude and arrogance, declare how it didn’t... an Intelligent Creator. If it were science, its adherents would not go apoplectic when questioned… then demand opposing views be silenced! That ain’t science, its dogma and ideology.


11 posted on 05/18/2018 9:12:44 AM PDT by FiddlePig (The biggest threat to your sacred liberty is to not value it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Toddsterpatriot

“Natural selection OBVIOUSLY MUST HAVE “selected” from genderless asexual replication the DNA information necessary for evolving the very first male and female forms necessary for sexual reproduction.”

Can you prove THAT?


19 posted on 05/18/2018 9:54:00 AM PDT by catnipman ((Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson