(January 11, 2015 at 11:50 pm)Chili Wrote:I feel like you are working toward some kind of point, but I cannot see what it is.(January 11, 2015 at 8:16 am)bennyboy Wrote: I don't think that makes sense. It's true that men don't make milk, but a) it could have been that some early mammals' males DID make milk; b) there may be added efficiency in not differentiating body parts. For example, many parts of the penis and vagina are actually shared structures, and they differentiate as the fetus develops; this saves energy during the crucial early development of the fetus.
It's just that evolutionary purpose is one about statistical persistence-- not necessarily the apparent outer "purpose" of an adult organisim.
Huh? Our sex is an illusion and is that not why early stage embryos are all female?
It is not my ambition to prove this here but as I understand it the actual sex cell division begins later. So obviously our sex is an add-on, or not.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 7, 2024, 2:55 pm
Thread Rating:
Detecting design or intent in nature
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)