Someone once told me ...

[Smurlos]

Sorry, Smurlos, I'm going through a tediously argumentative phase. Perhaps it's the menopause or something. Hopefully I'll grow out of it.

I don't believe that nature "intends" anything. Events take place and consequences result. Nature has no master blueprint. If the consequences confer advantage a new set of events become possible. As I understand it, this is simply natural selection. If nature had intention in the reproductive process what would be the purpose of infertility?

I disagree that everything has a purpose, but I would accept that "everything" (whatever that might mean) has a spectrum of possibilities.

Coming back to something like the main thrust of the discusssion, though, the diversity resulting from the natural selection process is important in the human species. How we deal with difference and diversity is one of the things that sets us apart from other species in the living world. I don't expect you have much experience with hatching chickens, but I would not want to be part of a world where diversity from the majority experience was dealt with in the day-old chick way (i.e. peck it till it dies).

Haha don't apologise, thats the whole point of a debate.
I was not personifying "nature" in anyway by attributing the quality of it being able to intend mile: I guess I should have used passive voice maybe... I am not very good with my english language hehe.

Either way all I meant was the way the two sexes have developed and their design shows that the main idea is they get together and reproduce.

As for the infertility thing, do we know if this has always been an issue throughout time? Or if the growing proportion of couples having fertility issues nowadays is a result of something human-induced such as mobile phones, pollution, global warming (hey they blame everything else on global warming, why not infertility too?).

I am a believer in science... but some questions arise such as... when you look at what happens with our DNA. Say a molecule of DNA magically developed through a series of chemical reactions millions of years ago. Now I don't know if it's down to a gap in my knowledge or what, but DNA in order to be copied, has to have bonds broken by an enzyme. The DNA strand then has to be matched up with its RNA partners and then pass through a transcription enzyme and ribosomes and then it has to go through dna helicase enzyme so the bonds form again between the two strands. There is so much specificity there, that it makes me think it can't just be coinsidence... but then I think, well if there were some divine being that sorted it all out... why did they make it so that there can be errors... why did they make such a complex system? So yes... I'm not too sure. Anyway i've gone majorly off topic now...