The Mystery of the Immaculately Conceived Baby Anteater

reply to post by Shark_Feeder

There are no known higher life forms, especially mammals, that are currently known to be capable of reproducing asexually.

There are. Some sharks can reproduce asexually. Would they not be considered 'higher life forms'. And apparently even Komodo Dragons can reproduce asexually too.

www.livescience.com...

I am sure there is a logical explanation for this. Whether like another poster said somebody secretly artificially inseminated the anteater for publicity. Or it could possibly be one of these two things:

Parthenogenesis under certain circumstances (that is, reproduction via self-cloning)
Gynogenesis (via the catalyst of a male nearby which does not actually fertilize the eggs)

It may very well have been the latter if the male Alf was around. Who knows....

But an interesting find OP.. s/f for thee

reply to post by DaRAGE


No it's the antichrist ....

I know bad joke, but I couldn't help myself!

reply to post by Shark_Feeder


actually - a DNA test will be very useful

if " alf " is determined to be the father - thus begins the investigation into weather gestation was abnormally delayed orabnormally rapid

2 - if no paternal DNA imput is found - ie - all markers come from the mother - then that demonstrates that asexual reproduction " of some sort " occured

3 - if a 3rd party paternal DNA is indicated - then again - how did it get there

but either way - the DNA test will show the origin of the " cub " and the direction the investigation into its origins must take

the cynic in me suspects an unauthorised artificial insemination experiment

reply to post by ignorant_ape


I stand corrected. I have some background in microbiology and genetics, but honestly I severely lack in those areas. One of the many reasons I am forcing myself back into school...need a "higher" level degree.

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by Xcathdra
There are plenty of species that can pull this off - asexual reproduction.

But there would need to be some evidence of that in historical research, and there is none. Don't you think someone, somewhere, would have noticed by now if Anteaters were capable of this?

Why? How many captive anteaters are out there, or has there ever been? Enough that we could make such a conclusive decision?

I've been aware of some female members of certain species reproducing without a male, though as far as I know they're only ever able to produce another female. And bringing jesus into this discussion is just distracting, jesus himself never made the outlandish claim that he was "immaculately" conceived; we know perfectly well how human babies were being made at that time in history.

After reading the article I see that they feel this was a case of delayed implantation. Meaning that the egg was fertilized then went dormant for a while. You see mom had a baby, then was separated from dad to prevent infanticide. Then during this time mom had a SECOND baby past the normal time for gestation. Gestation of Anteaters is about 6 months,

Hermaphrodite and it banged itself in the darkness of night

I love this story because it is a perfect demonstration of one of the biggest misconceptions that people have about science, on this forum and elsewhere.

Science is not a collection of facts. It is a method of collecting observations, interpreting those observations, and constructing a theory based on them. Any time someone points to something as a "scientific fact" they are being oxymoronic. Science completely rejects the notion of facts, because facts are unquestionable truths. When a new observation is made because of a yet-unrecorded phenomena the theories must be adjusted. The methods of observation themselves are also under constant scrutiny.

In this case a new phenomenon has been observed that defies any prior theories about anteater reproduction, so those theories are now being reevaluated. They may find that the anteaters coupled through a fence, which would be less profound but still worth noting, or that they are capable of delayed implantation, which would require significant adjustments to existing theories. They may even come up with a completely new theory based on this. Whatever the case may be it will change the scientific theories pertaining to anteater reproduction, and is a perfect example of the pliability of scientific thought.

A minor point, not really connected to the news story, but "Immaculate conception" isn't really the correct expression here. Immaculate conception refers to Mary's supposed sinlessness from the moment of conception. The word you're looking for is "Parthenogenesis", or "Virgin Birth" if you want a stronger connection to the Jesus story.

I read the article yesterday on the news on line, the baby is adorable and in perfect health, the explanation given was very simple, either she delayed the gestation or the conception happens during the instances in which both animals were housed next to each other with only a fence link in between, is possible that they rub each other or as we call it "nature always find a way", this time between the holes in the fence.

Is a simple explanation I am sure, but until we find more about the baby we are just speculating.

Have you guys not seen the documentary called Jurassic Park?

reply to post by johngrissom

This is what I was thinking
Time to recheck all of the genders.

It would be quite interesting to learn that evolution is driving asexual reproduction when there is an impossibility of normal copulation between a male and female of a certain species of animal. Why this would occur, or how this would occur, just blows me away. Of course we know that certain entities can reproduce asexually, but as far as I know asexual reproduction cannot be triggered via the absence of a partner for a given length of time. If this is what happened, the implications are staggering.

I think all of the other possibilities must be accounted for first. For instance, did a male sneak into the place somehow and mate with the female? If there are males in the same location, this may be a viable possibility. But if there is no way in or out of the cage, I cannot imagine something getting in. How long will the seed of a male anteater survive outside of its body I wonder? That would be strange if this pregnancy happened in the way I am alluding to, but it should be discounted scientifically before accepting asexual reproduction has occurred here. Also, this is self-evident, but it should also be proven that there have never been any known cases of asexual anteater reproduction sometime in the past. If this was documented before, then it surely is possible.

I have to suspect some of the zoo keepers in there. Naughty guys.

Maybe it got abducted by aliens and the aliens implanted a baby anteater into it. Just like in The Sims 2 with male sims giving birth.

Either it's the new Jesus in animal form, a male anteater has snuck in through the night, it's somehow managed to store sperm from the past, or it's an actual mammal that's managed asexual reproduction.

They should test the baba to see if the DNA is all mammy or if there's extra in. Are there any male anteaters at the park? Has it ever been around male anteaters in the past?

I mean, regardless of the outcome, all of those possibilities are pretty cool.

Although I, myself, love the idea of a male anteater climbing over the fence into her enclosure of a night time for a secret get-together that would be frowned upon by all of the staff. Anteater true love ftw

I also love the name of this thread. S&F

Has this creature had or reported, missing time, unexplained bruises or burns, reported seeing bright lights such as orbs of light, or unusual nose bleeds? If so might be an abductee. If that baby shows signs such as a rudimentary understanding of algebra and written language, or magical leaping abilities then we will know it's an alien hybrid. If any of the zoo keepers that had access to the mother are muslim males the explanation is probably a bit different.

reply to post by Shark_Feeder


Why be amazed? mosquitoes have been known to engage in parthenogenesis, why not mammals? Heck, why not Mary?

perhaps it was born with both genitalia?