How did the first human that evolved reproduce?

To understand biological evolution, consider the evolution of *languages*.

2000 years ago on the streets of Rome, they spoke Latin.

Today, on the streets of Rome, they speak Italian.

What happened?

Latin *evolved* into Italian.

The word "evolved" means *CHANGED SLOWLY*.

This was a long, slow, imperceptible change (which is what the word "evolution" means). Generation after generation, slight changes upon slight changes.

At no point was there ever a "first Italian speaker." At no point was some child born speaking a different language than others of its generation, or with members of its parents' generation .

The *language* ... spoken by the *population* in Rome alive at any time ... changes slowly over time, without there ever being a sudden "first Italian speaker."

That is exactly what "evolution" means in biological terms as well. Evolution means "SLOW CHANGE." At no point is a child born that is the "first human." At no point is the child born so genetically different that it cannot mate with others of its generation, or even its parents' generation.

The *species* .. the *population* of individuals alive at any given moment of time ... changes slowly over time, without there ever being a sudden "first human."

So asking who the "first human" could reproduce with ... is exactly like asking who the "first Italian speaker" could talk to!

Again, evolution is what happens to the *POPULATION* as individuals change slowly over generations.

First of all, we did NOT evolve from modern monkeys. We evolved from archaic Homo sapiens which in turn evolved from Homo erectus. And the changes between these were so very very small (really small) from generation to generation that only after looking at the grand scope of things, meaning Hundreds upon Hundreds of Thousands of Years do we get enough of a change to create a new species. It's a very slow process, but eventually the genome is different enough to no longer be compatible with ancient (Really ancient) ancestors.

I'd also like to point out that Monkeys have they're own line of evolution with their own ancestors. Humans and Monkeys haven't shared a common ancestor for Millions and Millions of years.

Evolution is a process that takes tens of thousands of years for any noticeable change, and only responds to what makes a species stronger. Overpopulation does not make a species stronger. IN RESPONSE TO YOUR ADDITIONAL DETAIL: Your question was asked because you mentioned sperm&sperm reproduction. you said nothing about reducing population. RESPONSE TO SECOND DETAIL: If you were to read the medical journals, you would have found that they're working on a way to change a sperm into an egg and vice-versa, so that a homosexual couple can have their own children without going to a sperm/egg bank. RESPONSE TO FIFTH DETAIL: I never said it did. Evolution takes a very, very, very, very long time. What a scientist does in a lab has nothing to do with something that takes a very, very, very, very long time. Just give it a rest. RESPONSE TO SIXTH DETAIL: I'm done talking about population control. I gave you an answer, and we argued, and there should've been consensus by now. Have a full life.

Evolution is a very slow process, with small changes taking place over a long period of time. As monkeys evolved into humans, there were many intermediate species in between. Each of these species was close enough to its predecessor that they could still mate. This continued until humans were completely evolved as humans.

Evolution is a GRADUAL process. A monkey didn't one day give birth to a human, the transition took hundreds of thousands of years, with each generation being very slighly different from the last.

Pay more attention in your Biology class, yeah?

The "first human" was almost genetically identical to the non-human primate they evolved from, they were close enough to continue breeding, the "human" mutation was the one that stuck in the offspring. In the centuries since, humans and apes have digressed down different evolutionary paths (an ape today is very different from the apes that gave rise to humans) to the point where we can no longer interbreed.

That is entirely possible. Frequently, differences are so subtle that the initial number of generations are not affected, until the next generation can no longer breed with the "true" ancestor, and an entirely new genus develops.

Evolution is still not completely clear in its subtleties; a lot remains to be found out.

my guess is that whatever it evolved from would have been somewhere between a human and a monkey, so the genes would not have been so far off to prohibit reproduction.

Since human's did not evolve, there is no answer to your question. Humans were created by God and reproduced the natural way.

hence the term "the missing link ".

evolution sounds like it might be true, if you deny the most likely and plausible explanation available. God made all things.

ps - the explainations found in biology class remind me of the blind men all describing an elephant. they were so ingulfed in the smaller part that they did not consider the whole.