Problems with both Creationism and Evolution

My problem with Evolution is this:Microscopic organisms do not reproduce like humans or most other plants and animals. How do you explain the differences in the two means of reproduction?My problem with Creationism is this:god was supposed to have created life and just about everything else, but who created god? If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?

Microorganisms have primitive forms of sexual reproduction. Conjugation in paramecia, ejecting packets of DNA into the environment, and other means. What they don't have is the level of specialization higher organisms have.

quote:

---

Microscopic organisms do not reproduce like humans or most other plants and animals. How do you explain the differences in the two means of reproduction?

---

There are microscopic organisms that have sexual reproduction, just alike larger organisms (for instance Chlamydomonas ).
What is exactly your question, Why and how sexual reproduction started?, Why asexual reproduction is still functioning?

​

[This message has been edited by Andor, 06-24-2002]

I believe that this link will answer your question about Creation: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3791.asp"The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning, as will be shown below. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause."

Sorry that I didn't really ask what I wanted to with that question. What I ment to ask is based on this premise: that evolution is completely logical. By this I mean that we can point out specific factors that influence evolution. My question about microscopic organisms was really: What factors could have possibly influenced the creation of more sophisticated methods of reproduction. I do believe in evolution, but I posed this question to hopefully get an answer; not to argue against evolution.

Simply put: If god doesn't have to have a beginning, why must the universe?

-The obvious advantage of sexual reproduction is a much faster production of genetic variation. It's then a great improvement when the species confront a rapidly variable environment.
On the other hand when the environment is stable, without changes, asexual reproduction may be advantageous.
There are species (mainly plants), that alternate between both ways of reproduction according to the environment.-A theory relates sexual reproduction with a better defense against parasites.

I see what the advantage is, but how would a species make that jump? It seems almost like there must be some thought behind it. My problem is that there is no obvious specific factor that would cause that. Another thing; this sort of thing is evolution in an entire species that must occur almost simultaneously. The only explanation that I can think of is that all of the species must have been effected by some factor that could cause this at the same time. Maybe a global event of some kind; or a local event if all of one species was concentrated in a specific area.

My problem with Creationism is this:god was supposed to have created life and just about everything else, but who created god? If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?That's very easy to answer! God created our minds so small that we can't imagine or comprehend how He could have been always there.
This is also in regard to Heaven. We can't imagine how wonderful and incredible Heaven really is! One day for those that believe we will be fully understanding and our minds fulfilled.

I don't know if this topic has been previously discussed in other threads. ?Probably the origin of recombination was not related with reproduction but as a DNA (or RNA) repair process. This model was proposed by Bernstein and col. (though I'm following Maynard Smith here): In the early Earth, with an atmosphere devoid of oxygen and ozone, haploid organisms would be very vulnerable to damage by UV radiation. It should be a great advantage to have copies of the genes in the cell. The high cost of this would be resolved by a periodically fusion with another cell, originating a dipoloid transitory, which would allow mutual repair.
With the progressive growth of genetic material, also increased the probability of lethal mutations, and the advantages of a duplicated genome, caused that, in time, the diploid state became the dominant one.
This process wasn't instantaneous. Have in mind that recombination probably evolved about 3 billion years ago as a mechanism of DNA repair, while sex evolved about 1-2 billion years ago in the early eukaryotes.

​

[This message has been edited by Andor, 06-27-2002]

You didn't even come close to answering my second question. I'll restate it for you.If god always existed, then why could the universe not have always existed?By the way, it's not that hard to fathom something that is infinite. Take, for instance a circle. It has no beginning and no end, thus it is infinite. Or that there are an infinite number of decimals between the numbers 0 and 1.

Yes, this topic has been discussed on one other thread, but I didn't know that until recently. Also, I accept your explanatio. It makes alot of sense and thoroughly answers my questions. Thank you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by octipice:
If god always existed, then why could the universe not have always existed?

---

The reason is that there is EVIDENCE that the universe had a beginning. Check the link I provided.God, BY DEFINITION, had no beginning, thus requires no cause.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
The reason is that there is EVIDENCE that the universe had a beginning. Check the link I provided.

​

God, BY DEFINITION, had no beginning, thus requires no cause.

---

This is nothing but wordplay.I define the universe as having always existed. Does this definition change anything? I think not. The Tao is defined as having always existed, has it?------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:
I define the universe as having always existed. Does this definition change anything? I think not. The Tao is defined as having always existed, has it?

​

---

Again, the PROBLEM is that there is good evidence that the universe had a beggining. If you want to blindly believe that the universe has always existed on faith- that's fine with me.If the God of the Bible was described as having a beginning, then there would be a problem. However, the Bible clearly describes God as always existing- which happens to be perfectly consistent with the laws of cause and effect.In short, there is evidence that the universe had a beginning, God is described in the Bible as being always existing, so therefore Christians have no trouble in answering the question "Who made God"?