How did sex evolve?

Evolution of male and female?
Both male and female systems would have had to evolve at the same time or the one would be useless and disappear.

A dividing cell

A Dividing Cell

How did Sex Evolve?

The complexity involved in the division of an asexual (DNA splits creating two identical halves) single celled organism is staggering. If the organism did not have all the mechanisms in place to survive, such as to: grow, eat and reproduce the first life form would die and the second life form would not in any way benefit from the first. The materialistic belief in a first life form requires reproduction. Unless an organism reproduces there can be no continuance of life.

However, lets make the giant leap and assume that time and chance in the prebiotic soup was successful at creating a single celled organism like Mycoplasma genitalium--the smallest living organism (a parasite). The question is, how can a single celled organism (asexual) evolve into higher organisms that require the species to reproduce through male and female (sexual) partners? To understand the complexity of higher organism sexuality go to How Things Work http://www.howstuffworks.com/human-reproduction.htm Here you will discover that the male and female each have several organs, muscles, chemicals requiring the right temperatures and have very complicated communication systems for enabling sex to occur. Both male and female systems would have had to evolve at the same time or the one would be useless and disappear. How could any organism evolve (through natural selection) so many features, organs, muscles, chemicals and communication system in both partners? To have a non-working reproductive system would be considered by the organism as a negative attribute and so the partially evolved organism would die without reproducing.

An often used allegation of evolutionists is that creationists offer religion while evolutionists offer scientific evidence. The reason for this statement is in their definition of science which limits "science" to naturalistic explanations. So no matter how illogical the evidence for a naturalistic cause, there is only one option for the educators committed to evolution--that is a naturalistic one. Therefore, any idea, supporting evidence or theory that does not point to a naturalistic cause is automatically ruled as "religious" and not scientific.

Another allegation of evolutionists is that there is no evidence for creation, there is only evidence for evolution. They say that creationists only point out the holes in evolution while having no scientific support for our own view. As already stated when creation is automatically ruled out as religious and not scientific then by definition there can be no evidence for creation!

In reality, the evidence for creation is logical, plentiful and elegantly directed to a creator. The evidence for creation is found in all branches of science. Because real science is the work of observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building of natural phenomena. If the work of scientific observations, testing, measurements etc. lead to a supernatural source that is just as scientific as those that lead to the philosophical source of naturalism. To be consistent those who want to throw out supernatural causes should also throw out philosophically based causes, namely the evolution of molecules to humanity.

When scientists examine aspirin from countless studies, then determine that it is an effective form of pain reliever, this is science. However, when scientists examine sexual organisms and asexual organisms then speculate about how sex might have evolved--that is not science that is craziness based on the belief that evolution (molecules to humanity) is true.. That is forcing a square peg into a round hole. There is no evidence for the evolution of sex and it is illogical. On the other hand, to examine the same data and conclude that sexual creatures were created is logical and fits the data.

It is unfortunate that evolutionists have such a powerful hold over the public educational systems. And it is unfortunate that educators all to often deny reality in favor of outright discrimination and distortion of the facts.

If this argument is of interest to you I encourage you to purchase the book, Evolution Shot Full of Holes. It clarifies the issues while providing a satisfying model of creation.