Wednesday, May 2, 2012

#1 Male and Female

When people see in their minds a chart of evolution, typically it looks like this:

This shows man evolving from an ape-like creature to a man. However, one extremely important and totally essential part is left out of this picture.

At every single step of the evolutionary process, there must have been a female developing exactly simultaneously the same genetic advancements along with the male.

If there were to be an "evolution" in the male body, for example, thumbs, but no simultaneous and corresponding evolution of thumbs in the female body, then thumbs would not likely propagate to the next generation. If it did, would all of the children necessarily have thumbs, or just some of them? Why wouldn't some have thumbs and some not have them? 

Since all of the people in the world have thumbs, then we have to assume that we all descended from that one man and one woman who had thumbs.

Also, why wouldn't there be people around today without thumbs? If some of my ancestors had no thumbs and some of my wife's ancestors had no thumbs, wouldn't there be odds that some of my children would have no thumbs.

(Note: This scenario would also have to hold true for animals and fish or any species with males and females .)

As an even more complicated example, when the male develops a penis, the female must necessarily have to develop a vagina. Otherwise, what advantage is the penis.

If you study the female human reproductive cycle, there are many changes taking place throughout the month. For example, her vagina is normally toxic for sperm. Only during a few days each month does that change and her vagina actually becomes very hospitable to sperm and a mucous is created with fibers that help the sperm along their way to fertilize the egg. A phenomenal development that must have occurred at the time that a man got a penis.

And that's not all. Even if a male body develops a change and a female body develops a corresponding change, they still have to meet each other and mate successfully. 

In other words, they have to live in close proximity to each other. They both have to be of child-bearing age. They have to mate. That mating has to produce a male child or a female child that inherits the new advanced trait. Then when that child grows up he or she must also find a mate with the same advanced trait to mate with successfully.

Are you thinking about the odds of all this happening?

I suppose you could assume that the new advanced trait is dominant. Then if any one individual has the mutation, then all of his/her offspring would have it. But isn't that a faith based assertion.

You could also hold onto faith in randomness and believe in very tiny changes taking place over millions of years. But you still have a theory based on faith and not scientific proof. That's not any better "proof" than my proof. And mine is far more elegant. Somehow I'm not able to imagine that such a method produces a viable penis and vagina through tiny incremental changes.

Evolution theory has to postulate that any advancement somehow spreads throughout the entire human population of all males and females. In other words, everyone of us had an ancester that had the trait. Either we all descended from an original male and female that had the trait or else all those born without the new trait totally died out and never reproduced. 

When the odds of an event A happening are 10% and the odds of a second event B happening are 10%, then what are the odds that both A and B happen? This is calculated by multiplying the odds together. In this case, the odds of both A and B happening are 1%.

Even being extremely generous, I can't imagine the odds of some of the circumstances described above being anywhere in the neighborhood of 10%.

To believe that the above process happened at random without an intelligent creator invisibly guiding the process requires a huge amount of faith, faith in randomness and chaos to produce order and beauty. That's more faith than most religious people have.

There must be a God.


  1. Dear Jim, You are a dangerous man!
    Very nicely written, it provides a generous helping of food for thought and discussion... I'll certainly share this with friends and colleagues!

    Wishing you and your family a most Blessed new year!

  2. Very logically, well thought out, too bad scientist don't have this much common sense!

  3. Good insight Jim. Thanks for the time and the research and the words to formulate what I believe but cant' describe. I've worked with smarter people than me who.snicker at my belief system yet I feel sorry for them for their unbelief, which they proudly wear as a badge of honour. Your points are well taken.

  4. Wow!!! This one article alone, should make any sensible human being immediately see that evolution is the biggest fraud ever committed, this is Awesome, with much love from Ayo

  5. I happened upon your site and have enjoyed how you've
    presented your information logically and how it ties in with science.
    There is so much scientific evidence showing the incredible complexity of life and the gargantuan
    amount of information required single cells to understand the blueprints ( DNA / RNA) and the ability to develop all the required independent
    body systems that act on their own , but are also
    required for the functioning of the other systems and for life itself.

    I've enjoyed reading your articles and I'm looking forward to reading more.