Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Asexual production is better for the survival of the species you are actually going backwards on the evolutionary scale.
Better in what way? Also, how would large organisms like humans reproduce asexually while still maintaining genetic diversity in the population? I
would argue that sexual reproduction benefits us more (genetic diversity, sexual selection, relative simplicity) than asexual reproduction would.
Additionally, there is no "backwards" on the evolutionary scale. This implies that evolution is a linear progression of increasing
efficiency/usefulness (whatever). This is a misconception about the nature (pun) of natural selection and evolutionary theory. Evolution doesn't have
an end goal.
Even if evolution was a linear progression as previously described, asexual reproduction existed before sexual reproduction. So no, sexual
reproduction wouldn't be moving backward, but instead forward. This doesn't matter though, because that's not how evolution works.
edit on
6-4-2011 by PieKeeper because: (no reason given)