Science proves virgin birth
Not so fast. And scientists from Queen's University helped to break the story.
Post categories: Religion
William Crawley | 22:50 UK time, Wednesday, 23 May 2007
Not so fast. And scientists from Queen's University helped to break the story.
Jump to more content from this blog
For the latest updates across ´óÏó´«Ã½ blogs,
visit the Blogs homepage.
You can stay up to date with Will & Testament via these feeds.
Will & Testament Feed(ATOM)
If you aren't sure what RSS is you'll find useful.
These are some of the popular topics this blog covers.
´óÏó´«Ã½ © 2014 The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.
Comments
Jesus Christ as a shark...hmmm, mabye we have the makings of a new religion here. If we put on our thinking caps, there may be some money to be made in it. Well that could explain how he fed 5000 people with just two fish and five loaves. Guess they had fish sandwiches. There's only one problem with this theory, all offspring from parthenogenesis will be female because there are no Y chromosomes, only X. Hmmm, Jesus Christ as a woman. Think of how that would knock all theories of religion into a cocked hat. Not only would this send Christians into orbit, it would make Moslems at least as angry since they see Jesus Christ as an important prophet too. I wonder if that would start a row in the Islamic world as great as the cartoons from Denmark did. Hmmmm. I could always say the devil made me do it :-)
This is actually very interesting - if sharks can do it on their own, why not humans in a few millenia (if we're still here!?) Probably fanatic christians (not quite a tautology) would twist it to argue that females need not have sex at all, unless of course to curb 'men's urges' which we are responsible for after all. Not as if men could have responsibility for their own urges, as the ridiculously insulting rape and paedophilia sentences meted out to priests suggest.
Perhaps this could help set homosexuality in a new evolutionary light? If the drive of evolution leads to asexual reproduction, then sex becomes a purely recreational activity and it does not matter to the future of the species if large sections of the population become as gay as a handbag full of rainbows.