Why Would Natural Selection Do That?

Natural selection is the gradual, non-random process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population. Individuals with certain variants of the trait survive and reproduce more than individuals with other variants.

Some flowers have non-functional stamens (male parts) in female flowers. Some flowers have non-functional pistils (female parts) in male flowers.

Most flowers have both sexes of reproductive organs (stamens and pistils).

These others however have only one or the other. Having both where only one set works is a waste of materials.

© Oolon Colluphid 2003, 2009

Why would evolution produce something so wasteful or of essentially no use

Why would those who have such a poor design not die off and

Why wouldn't those with a better design be selected instead?

Isn't that the whole point of natural selection?

=====

You may wish to ask yourself, "Why are fraudulent and misleading "evidences" for evolution present in our children's textbooks?"  

For example, “Why are the Miller / Urey experiments purporting to produce amino acids from the components of early earth’s atmosphere still in school science books and why are well known scientists still referring to these failed experiments as proof for naturalistic evolution? You know, that inanimate and inorganic chemicals and gases evolve?"

Why Along with the Miller / Urey fiasco, do we still find in our children's textbooks:
. Darwin’s Tree of Life - purporting to show common ancestry is now completely unsupported by the fossil record, but still present in our children’s textbooks as proof for biological evolution;
. Darwin's finches are used as evidence for evolution. Even though we know that the beaks of these finches change naturally (adaptations) with the amount of rainfall. Yet this is still present in our children’s textbooks as proof for biological evolution;.

. Haeckel’s Embryos - purporting a common ancestor - is known (since 1860) to be fraudulent and misleading, but is still present in our children’s textbooks as proof for biological evolution;
. Gill slits / pouches in human embryos - purported as evidence for a common ancestor - now known to be simple skin folds but presented in a knowingly misleading fashion (even fish don’t have gills at that stage of development) while empirically false, are still present in our children’s textbooks as proof for biological evolution;
. Archaeopteryx as a the half-bird / half-reptile - NOT - missing link with thousands of transitional forms soon to be discovered - NOT - but is still present in our children’s textbooks as proof for common ancestry and biological evolution.
. Java and Piltdown Man, both now known to be glaring examples of shoddy and speculative science - at best - yet still present in our textbooks as examples of common ancestry.

If there is so much new evidence for macro evolution why is fraudulent evidence, lies really, still being used?There is only one reason that atheist driven science is still leaning on fraud and deception to build up evolution, and that is because there is nothing more substantial to use. When confronted with the LACK of evidence, these “scientists” say, “Well, we know the theory is true even if the evidence doesn’t support it. In one hundred years you can’t expect us to throw out what’s false and include all this great new compelling evidence.”

Right, let’s give students our worst evidence, false evidence, deception and outright lies. We have much better evidence but we’re not going to let anyone know what it is.

“Students and the public are being systematically misinformed about the evidence for evolution" through biology textbooks (Wells 2000: xii).