DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - How is the balance between boys and girls maintained?

**JeremyBalll** · 12-18-2011, 03:39 AM

Elok you just said nothing happens by chance, yet that's my claim, and you thetefore call it inane. You *******. Go **** yourself!

Wow, I'm really feeling the love here. Let's try this again: I do believe in God, and that God is ultimately in control of all things. However, your argument in favor of God in this thread is very poor. Men and women are born in roughly equal numbers for a rather obvious reason, to wit:

A given person will be disposed, by biological factors, to have more male or female offspring (it's not "chance" in any meaningful sense, things like uterine pH are involved). These may vary by a good deal within a population. Suppose that, for some reason, a population is skewed towards one gender heavily, say 65% male to 35% female. Assuming anything even vaguely like monogamy (polygamy would complicate things, but not enough to produce that skewed of a ratio, I don't think, due to things like infidelity and maybe the limited fertility of human females), a very large proportion of those males--a number of whom would have the tons-o'-boys gene--would be unable to pass on their genes for lack of a partner. A few would get through, having mostly male offspring--who would face the same merciless selection process their fathers barely survived. This is all very simplified, but unless having a lot of male children were completely tied to a reproductive advantage like "can shoot lightning from his eyeballs to kill and instantly perfectly cook game animals," it would eventually die out on its own.

Supposing a population, by sheer biological perversity, did produce only males or only females? Then that population would die out unless it got outsiders of the other sex to marry in. Undoubtedly this has happened a certain number of times with smaller groups, but the larger the group, the more unlikely such an event is to happen, not only by sheer numbers but due to genetic diversity and all sorts of other things.

So, if you adopt a nontheistic POV for the sake of argument--it hasn't given me any horrible atheist cooties yet--you can see how your objection is no objection at all. That POV is only nontheistic, not atheistic--it doesn't mention God one way or another. It mentions the way the universe works without mentioning God, Who, after all, is beyond human intellect and thus pointless to try and factor into the equation. Being able to look at the fun universe He gave me doesn't make me an atheist. See: Newton, Isaac.

12-18-2011, 03:39 AM	#36
JeremyBalll Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 499 Senior Member	Elok you just said nothing happens by chance, yet that's my claim, and you thetefore call it inane. You *****. Go ** yourself! Wow, I'm really feeling the love here. Let's try this again: I do believe in God, and that God is ultimately in control of all things. However, your argument in favor of God in this thread is very poor. Men and women are born in roughly equal numbers for a rather obvious reason, to wit: A given person will be disposed, by biological factors, to have more male or female offspring (it's not "chance" in any meaningful sense, things like uterine pH are involved). These may vary by a good deal within a population. Suppose that, for some reason, a population is skewed towards one gender heavily, say 65% male to 35% female. Assuming anything even vaguely like monogamy (polygamy would complicate things, but not enough to produce that skewed of a ratio, I don't think, due to things like infidelity and maybe the limited fertility of human females), a very large proportion of those males--a number of whom would have the tons-o'-boys gene--would be unable to pass on their genes for lack of a partner. A few would get through, having mostly male offspring--who would face the same merciless selection process their fathers barely survived. This is all very simplified, but unless having a lot of male children were completely tied to a reproductive advantage like "can shoot lightning from his eyeballs to kill and instantly perfectly cook game animals," it would eventually die out on its own. Supposing a population, by sheer biological perversity, did produce only males or only females? Then that population would die out unless it got outsiders of the other sex to marry in. Undoubtedly this has happened a certain number of times with smaller groups, but the larger the group, the more unlikely such an event is to happen, not only by sheer numbers but due to genetic diversity and all sorts of other things. So, if you adopt a nontheistic POV for the sake of argument--it hasn't given me any horrible atheist cooties yet--you can see how your objection is no objection at all. That POV is only nontheistic, not atheistic--it doesn't mention God one way or another. It mentions the way the universe works without mentioning God, Who, after all, is beyond human intellect and thus pointless to try and factor into the equation. Being able to look at the fun universe He gave me doesn't make me an atheist. See: Newton, Isaac.
	Quote