Did the human or did the frog came first?

Answer 1

Like Yin and Yang, one would have to say that males and females evolved simultaneously... and there is no male without a female.

In evolution asexual replication would have evolved before sexual replication. For example, bacteria (prokaryotes) are considered to be earlier on the evolutionary tree than eukaryotes (yeasts, molds, and all plants and animals).

The Bacteria divide asexually. However, they are also able to share genes via plasmids as well as picking up environmental DNA.

In a sense, the sharing of plasmids is similar to sexual reproduction, with the entire bacteria resembling the oocyte, and having all organelles to support life. The plasmid would resemble the spermatocyte, only having what is necessary to transmit its genes, and lacking the other cellular organelles. Note, while spermatocytes have mitocondria, for example, they do not transmit mitochondrial DNA to the oocyte.

However, the stability of the genome which would be necessary for the evolution of higher organisms would have required the development of a method not only to share genes, but to also maintain a relatively fixed genome arrangement, and thus the development of the very complex meiosis. Again, it probably would have been developed simultaneously with a mutual method for males and females to share half their DNA (except for the mitochondrial DNA that only comes from the female).

If one looks at the equine species. Different members of the equine species have different numbers of chromosomes and different distributions of genes on the chromosomes. And, while they can interbreed and produce viable first generation offspring, this creates unpaired chromosomes and the offspring are unable to undergo meiosis as would be required for producing second generation offspring.

The Homo Sapien species points back to a "Mitochondrial Eve" approximately 200,000 years ago from which all living humans derive. Neanderthal man became evolutionary distinct from Homo Sapiens around that time, but co-existed with humans for over 100,000 years more. There is no evidence of significant interbreeding of the two hominid species, perhaps because of not being able to produce viable second generation offspring just like horses and donkeys are unable to have second generation offspring.

It is likely that a chromosomal shift occurred either in a single step, or rapid succession during the time of Mitochondrial Eve that necessarily excluded interbreeding with Neanderthals. This shift would have occurred in a single tribe or family, but would have symmetrically affected both males and females of the tribe or family, with no true distinction between the males or females coming first other than an unknown firstborn in the family.

Oddly the human male lineage ("Y" Chromosome Adam) is only about 60,000 years old, and is much younger than mitochondrial Eve. Certainly "Adam" would have had ancestors with lineages tracing back to Eve's time. But, about 60,000 years ago a line of dominant males evolved which effectively was able to out compete all other homo sapien males to the point that over time it became the only surviving male bloodline.

It wouldn't be unexpected though if one considers polygamous animal species in which most females of "breeding age" eventually breed, but many males never have offspring, thus female lineages would have greater diversity than male lineages.

Answer 2

The human came first, because when God created the Earth he made Adam and Eve and they were not babies. He created adults so they could multiply and make the Earth fruitful.

OR the Big bang theory, we were fish originally, then we evolved :)

Answer 3

The frog came first, because when God created the Earth He made all of the animals and THEN the humans.

Answer 4

That is hard to say because humans and bovines have different lineages. We are related to them in the fact that we are both mammals but our lines separated a very long time ago.