Macro and Micro Evolution

Would you settle for a single-cell algae evolving into a colonial organism? That's kind of a half-step in between what you're asking for:

quote:

---

Coloniality in Chlorella vulgaris Boraas (1983) reported the induction of multicellularity in a strain of Chlorella pyrenoidosa (since reclassified as C. vulgaris) by predation. He was growing the unicellular green alga in the first stage of a two stage continuous culture system as for food for a flagellate predator, Ochromonas sp., that was growing in the second stage. Due to the failure of a pump, flagellates washed back into the first stage. Within five days a colonial form of the Chlorella appeared. It rapidly came to dominate the culture. The colony size ranged from 4 cells to 32 cells. Eventually it stabilized at 8 cells. This colonial form has persisted in culture for about a decade. The new form has been keyed out using a number of algal taxonomic keys. They key out now as being in the genus Coelosphaerium, which is in a different family from Chlorella.

---

I especially like that last sentence. That's a major morphological change to jump into a different family.

In higher-order animals? It accounts for them because lower-order animals have them too. Sex isn't a recent development.The idea is that gender starts at the genetic level, in single-cell or colonial organisms. For instance slime molds have some 50 different genders or so.The difference in sexual morphology is just a natural development from a genetic gender. Also you might be interested to know that there's a species of ungendered snails that both have spiky penis-like structures. To mate two snails will "fence" until one of them is penetrated by the other's implement. At that point it's that snail that will bear the offspring (lay eggs or whatever.)

Nah, more like the recognition of a trend - naturalism has always come up with a better model than supernaturalism; why suppose it'll be any different here?