for Mammuthus - you made the big time!

The bold italics were not mine. This is Scott's doing, I am sure. salty

I stand on my comments. If Scott would read (he is a confessed spot reader) my Manifesto he would find complete documentation for the experimental proof that the female is all alone perfectly capable of producing both sexes. I also document this in a paper which now resides in the Documents bin at Terry's forum. It's title is "Evolution and Metaphysics: A Convergence Through Parthenogenesis". At least Terry, until recently at least, tolerates differences of opinion without resorting to the kind of epithets characteristic of Scott Page. salty, the "old coot"

Mr. P. Thanks for the recent references. I haven't even pretended to keep up with any human research. The facts are that semi-meiotically produced frogs can be either male or female and also perfectly fertile. This proves beyond any question that the female genome is perfectly competent to produce both sexes. I guess you don't think much of frogs, especially when they disclose something that doesn't require a sex determining mechanism. salty

I am not indignant at all. I am just disappointed that I seem to be the only person on this forum that realizes that macroevolution (real speciation)is finished. Of course I must be daft to make such a totally stupid statement, just as were Pierre Grasse, Julian Huxley and Robert Broom. They too were crazy weren't they? Don't answer, of course they were. salty