Evolution of Sex

Evolution of Sex. Randall Niles reviews the Darwinian dilemma.

The origin and subsequent maintenance of sex and recombination is a phenomena not easily explained by Darwinian evolution. Evolutionary mechanisms such as natural selection are not able to reveal why organisms should abandon asexual reproduction in favor of more costly and inefficient sexual reproduction. In his book, The Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution of Genetics and Sexuality, Graham Bell described the dilemma in the following manner:

Sex is the queen of problems in evolutionary biology. Perhaps no other natural phenomenon has aroused so much interest; certainly none has sowed as much confusion. The insights of Darwin and Mendel, which have illuminated so many mysteries, have so far failed to shed more than a dim and wavering light on the central mystery of sexuality, emphasizing its obscurity by its very isolation.

Evolution of Sex The move to sexual reproduction:

Most single-celled organisms reproduce asexually. Asexual reproduction is the formation of new individuals from cells of only one parent, without gamete formation or fertilization by another member of the species. If life on earth is derived entirely from these single-celled creatures then why was this simple-yet-efficient method of asexual reproduction set aside in favor of sexual reproduction?

Why does sex exist? In his book Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea, Carl Zimmer concedes:

Sex is not only unnecessary, but it ought to be a recipe for evolutionary disaster. For one thing, it is an inefficient way to reproduceAnd sex carries other costs as wellBy all rights, any group of animals that evolves sexual reproduction should be promptly outcompeted by nonsexual ones. And yet sex reigns Why is sex a success, despite all its disadvantages?

From the perspective of evolutionary biology, sex is without question an inefficient way to reproduce. Consider all that the sexual process entails, including the complexity involved in reproducing the information carried within the DNA. From an evolutionary point of view, sex would be considered an absurdity. Yet from a design point of view, it is nothing short of incredible!

Please visit http://www.allaboutscience.org/evolution-of-sex.htm for more information on the Evolution of Sex and other matters of Darwinian Evolution vs. Intelligent Design.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Evolution of Sex
• Evolution
• Darwinian Evolution
• Reproduction
• Design
• Science
• Origin of Sex
• You Tube
• Video
• Randall Niles

[KnightlySirJames1]

My list is a laughable joke, huh?

Psychologist, huh???

facsinating...what psychologist did you go to to imagine a list I haven't given yet?

Thankyou for disqualifying yourself from my continued effort by your psychotic refusal to examine offered facts.

[Ironhoist]

Good stuff Randall. It's nice to see something from you.

it's been some time.

God bless

[x5vampire5x]

....This video makes no sense....

[jamesrking1]

It is a miracle how good sex is even if it does not create life. I think it will be impossible to unlearn the Darwin tree of life theory that is being taught in our school systems. Have you ever thought about a theory of life where every specie on earth has a separate tree from which it came. I think about the miracle of my life this way because I think a lot about my direct ancestors going back many generations to the base of my tree. Other specie other tree

[jingle3]

If anyone watching this video wants to learn about real science, check out the video titled "Sexual And Asexual Reproduction."

[jingle3]

Please stop trying to talk about things you don't know anything about and don't understand. There are things called schools - colleges and universities. You can go there and take an actual science class to learn about biology and evolution. Give it a try.

[1Soleb]

what the fuck did i just hear.

[klfraam]

According to darwinian evolution sex shouldn't have happened? Than why did Darwin write so much about sexual selection? But lets get to his main point: sex is harmful for evolution and an inefficient way of reproducing. First of al look around, most organisms reproduce sexually, logically it follows that this should be a good way to do it. Secondly sex speeds up natural selection: more variation because of mixed genes equals more for natural selection to work upon equals a high evolution rate

[orfygage]

Also, I don't know if you guys have ANY clue about biology, even life, but when different "species" (not exclussively talking about animal species) combine themselves, there comes a better result in their next generation.

If you believe that an advantageous mutations should be passed to the next generation through division and not combination-sex, let's see what kids you can have with your relatives (sister-cousin?), and what kids will you have with a strange woman.

no characters remaining. soz

[orfygage]

@fellowservant34 Did you ever ask a biologist about male+female sexual reproduction and the theory of evolution? Who told you they have no answers about that?

And what coincidences are you even talking about? All biology, physics, SCIENCE (!) is based on FACTS and not on faith. The only exeption I can think of, is The Big Bang, and that is just a theory, nothing proven, and they admit it.

Evolution is PROVEN, god did not create us and does not exist. I'm sorry to burst that bubble for all of you

[orfygage]

What the hell are you talking about Randall? Darwyn's theory of evolution never said that evolution was created by dividing organisms. Evolution also "happens" from generation to generation. How do you think he suggested we are an evolution of monkeys? Don't they reproduct themselves with sex?

Evolution happens from cell mutation. We did evolve from what was once a 1 cell organism and we WILL evolve into something different in some millions/billions of years.

[CetraTJ]

interesting video. This is a question Ive struggled to find a conclusive answer to. Unfortunately, your attitude and dis-regard of scientific analysis puts into question your summery. I find this a lot with creationist videos. Please take more time to carefully examine your arguement so that more people will take you seriously! If you've ever watched a video of creationists arguing against carbon dating, you'll know what Im talking about! thanks for posting this vid :)

[slider576]

@XXXMikeHonchoXXX So you say but either way you look at it, the evolutionary explanation for the development of sex it really nothing more than a random guess with nothing to back it up other than the fact that they can't think of anything better. Tell me, is there any evidence of this environmental stress during the time that sex evolved, do they even know when sex evolved? Even if we assume that there was some kind of stress what are the chances that it randomly caused sex to evolve?

[OperationOperafox]

@fellowservant34 I think you mean you don't have a basic understanding of biology.

[OperationOperafox]

@urbanh196398105 You're right... you're not a biologist. Individuals don't evolve, populations evolve, at no point is one generation signficantly different from the successive generation.

[XXXMikeHonchoXXX]

this guy is retarded, they didn't mean emotional stress! they meant stress as in the radiation was heavy on them(genetically causing mutation), perhaps the radiations caused extreme radical mutations(Cambrian explosion-scale) in their genetic codes or what have you.and perhaps the mutations developed is how they were able to reproduce amongst themselves. also think about animals in life, most rely on there partner to make sure their offspring will live(they help) and are FAR MOREcomplexOrganisms

[toasted2009]

Thanks! Vids are so great!

[spamweiter]

always an insight watching your videos, keep it up!

[urbanh196398105]

i'm not a biologist or anything but it seems to me that, farther up the food chain from bacteria and fruit flies, say in the case of a lower primate, a male and female of some higher species would have had to have mutated with new and complementary genetic material at the same exact historical time in order to successfully reproduce a new species. Any way i look at it, if evolution occurred natural selection fails to completely explain it. It had to be a sort of slow-motion miracle of God.

[fellowservant34]

Not only does the theory of evolution have no answers for male and female sexual reproduction, it has no good answers for anything we see in all of nature. When one considers the innumerable coincidences evolutionist's are counting on to have happened, the odds alone make evolution a statistical impossibility....I don't have that kind of faith.

[JonathanMcLatchie]

Perhaps, garrison68, you would be so kind as to correct Randall's alledged error. It is one thing to say that someone is mistaken; to substantiate that assertion is another task altogether!

J

[JonathanMcLatchie]

Please keep the language mild.

So, perhaps you would clare to specify where in particular Randall has been found guilty of "lying" or deception.

J

[Epydemic2020]

hiyosilver

To clarify my last point a bit. Evolution of sex would not happen quickly. A random mutation would not take you from being asexual to having sexual reproduction like we see between humans. The process would likely start with optional sexual reproduction at a basic level. We aren't even talking about eggs or sperm yet. This would be at the level of the cell, and refers to a process called "meosis".

p.s. I am a Christian. I just thought that might be good to clarify that.

[Epydemic2020]

hiyosilver

You seem to think that if sex evolved, it would have to produce a male and female randomly and simultaneously. This is not the case. There are many shades of gray in between the transition from asexual to sexual reproduction. There are examples of creatures at every stage of that transition.

"speciation" is seen in the lab. Perhaps you define specie incorrectly? I can understand if you were to say new "kinds" don't evolve, but new species certainly do.

[hiyosilver100]

Besides the mechanics of sex "evolving", One mechanism that limits one specie from evolving into a new specie- Not that it is possible, but IF an organism did make sufficient changes to arrive on earth as another specie from the parent, TWO organisms that made the identical changes in MALE and FEMALE would need to "evolve" in the same area at the same time for that organism to go any further! The odds of THAT happening? Zero! Evolution of one specie to another is not possible.

[danielleVIDZ]

woooo this is so awesome! i thought about this a while ago and i wasnt sure if it was a good point or not but you just proved me right :) evolution.. pshhh