Basic HTML Version
•
complicated as sex entered the picture. This is a problem for
evolutionists, because, according to natural selection, complications
are not supposed to be rewarded with success. Yet sexual
reproduction-so much more intricate, and sometimes ungainly,
than nonsexual reproduction-has become predominant
among living things.
Think of all that is involved! Sexual reproduction in
the animal kingdom requires two independent individuals
of the same species to find each other and then, at the
appropriate time, to mate.
Highly specialized internal and external organs are
needed. Through an intricate process a sperm from
one individual must locate and unite with the ovum
or egg from another. The fertilized egg, which in the
mammalian world begins to grow, must then be
protected and nourished over an extended period of
time until it develops into an independent living
entity.
Reproduction in the plant kingdom is hardly less
intricate. And birds have their own unique problems
in hatching their eggs.
Why would sexless life forms that were successfully
and efficiently reproducing nonsexually turn to a
much more complicated method? Indeed,
how
could
they turn to it, for they were only able to reproduce
identical-sexless--copies of themselves?
If,
somewhere in the eons of time, the idea to
reproduce sexually occurred to a nonsexual life form,
as absurd as that may sound, how would it go about
acquiring the complex, yet necessary, equipment, to
say nothing about convincingly communicating the
concept to at least one contemporary, who would have
to develop the complementary equipment, as well as
passing on the idea to succeeding generations?
And what if no one else was interested?
Remember that sex would not have been required in order
for life to exist. Proof of this is that sexless life forms were
already successfully existing and reproducing. So successfully
in fact that nonsexual reproduction is still the method used by
thriving minute life forms that have remained basically
unchanged since the beginning.
Why sex then? This perplexing question is one of the
nagging enigmas evolutionary science cannot
adequately explain. Neither is the explanation adequately
~
forthcoming from educators or specialists in sexual
lli
matters. They, with fe:;¡ exceptions, must take for granted
~
that sexual differences somehow evolved and, .,
starting at that unproved point, they attempt to deal with
~
15