...then how did life evolve to the point where there were males and females of almost every species?

I'm not trying to disprove the idea. It's too cool an idea to want to get rid of. But it's apparently one of those big questions that evolutionists don't like to think about, so I figure maybe I'd check to see if it's something video game hobbiests would.

What? What "evolutionists" said that? I'm betting it didn't come from an evolutionist, or an expert, at all.

Asexual reproduction = very little variation of information. Can only go so far.

Sexual reproduction = sharing of information, genes, allowing for variation.

Some minute organisms reproduce through sharing information, not necessarily sexual reproduction, giving us the basis to assume that was the start of shared reproduction.

<insert the piles of scientific evidence showing this to be a viable theory here, as it does exist, but as this is a forum of, as you said, "hobbiests", it has no place really being discussed here>

End thread.

Gosh darnit, when will I start thinking these things through?! "Evolutionists don't like thinking about it." That was just asking for trouble. >_<

Forget I brought this up. I'm just some random idiot that comes to conclusions just by reading a few sentences of a single article.

....WHAT?

Evolutionists don't like to think about it, so....video game players have the answer?

What's more interesting to consider, really, is at what point, and in response to what pressures, did this leap in method occur; and then at what points were the logical pressures and strictures of 'sex' provoked into developing the concept of gender, instinctual rather than social, in this instance; and finally (not really, but I should be stopping about now), at what point, and in response to what pressures, does the fact of sex and gender become particular, specified to the other evolutionary traits of a single species, and what were the traits that were universal and inherent developments in things with sexual differences.

This is what I was last looking into on the matter, anyway - and the evolutionary sciences seemed very interested in it, at the time.

i prefer to believe in something that seams plausible then to disagree purely out of blindness. humanity is flawed, so anything that it produces is also inherently flawed.