Also it is important to note that YECs believe that most of the fossils we have in the fossil record originated in the flood. This means that in some cases there would have been quite an extreme bottleneck effect as a representative species from a kind was taken onto the ark, which then rapidly diversified after the flood, so really we are talking about relatively constant stasis.
Nope.
You are talking about evolution at several hundred times the rate proposed by paleontologists.
Lets just take the case for modern man vs. earlier species.
Creationist author "John Woodmorappe" writes:
...Homo ergaster, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, and Homo neanderthalensis can best be understood as racial variants of modern man—all descended from Adam and Eve, and most likely arising after the separation of people groups after Babel. (Source)
So what you have here is the exact evolution proposed by paleontologists, which they suggest occurred over a period of about two million years, being crammed into the time from Babel to the advent accurate historic records. What creationists are doing is showing paleontologists are correct about the ability of evolution to enact change, but in this case creationists are going them one better: they are proposing the exact same evolution at a rate several hundred times faster and
in reverse!
Note that in the creation model there are far less catastrophic changes in environment (basically the flood and the following Ice age are the main two) than in the evolution model. How did these organisms stay more or less the same over those vast periods of time even through many drastic changes?
Your suggested dates are contrary to all empirical evidence. First, there is no empirical evidence for a global flood ca. 4,350 years ago (the data suggested by biblical scholars). Second, there is absolutely no evidence of an ice age after that date (since 4,350 years ago). Rather, there is evidence for a lot of ice ages earlier than that date. The most recent began to wane some 15,000 years ago.
Try again with more reference to empirical evidence and less reference to creation mythology?
Once we get the dating straightened out we can deal with stasis, eh?
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
