No, that's not the evidence I asked for. I asked for a SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT that DEMONSTRATES the HYPOTHESIS that a PURELY ASEXUAL organism can evolve/transition into a PURELY SEXUAL REPRODUCING organism, to which I've had multiple evolutionists admit that there is no such evidence, and hence, no good reason to believe the claim that it happened "billions of years ago." If you are looking for a scientific experiment where a lab based experiment shows the evolution from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction - then you will not find it. If you are basing your acceptance of scientific fact purely on this type of evidence then you are going to have to throw out a lot of our modern science, i.e. I cannot show you any experiment that will show an electron, yet they do exist. Science and scientists use observation and examination of evidence. They look at the data and come up with an hypothesis. This hypothesis is tested against the evidence and predictions are made, i.e. for C to have happened, A and B must also have happened in that order, if that is true then D must be the next step. When they find evidence of D then they know they are on the right track. This data is sent for publication where a team of their peers look to falsify the data, see where it is wrong, only if it passes this test is the data published and becomes a scientific theory. Even after this many scientists will examine it to see if it is wrong - nothing is accepted on face value - and if at some later stage further data becomes available that disproves the original hypothesis - it is adapted or scrapped as appropriate.
Typical evolutionist. "You can't explain it because you don't know anything about evolution." It's the typical response evolutionists give whenever someone says they don't believe evolution and ask for details without accepting the vauge answers of "oh, it definetly evolved over millions of years," because evolutionists can't handle when their religious beliefs are questioned in the details, so instead they spew forth one-liners like "it's a fact whether you believe it or not," because all they can do is assume they are right instead of actually providing the details and scientific evidence that is asked for.
And that's why this conversation isn't worth having with you, not because "you're right and evolution is right," although that's the only possibility your arrogance will allow you to believe.
