Potential Evidence for a Global Flood

Yes this is true.
Just to develop it a little.......
We already do have evidence for mitochondrial eve. It is very likelty that everyone on the planet descends from a woman in Egypt from 180,000 - 220,000 years ago.Interestingly the male equivalent - Y Chromosome Adam - dates back much more recently to between 60,000 and 90,000 years ago in Africa.For creationsist I had better explain that neither M-Eve nor Y-Adam were the 'first'. There may have been millions of other humans (more likely tens of thousands) but the fact is that they, for reasons of chance mainly, are the ancestors that we all happened to descend from. It isn't too difficult to get your head round if you think about it.For Y-Adam, we all have to date back to an original, but that original doesn't have to be the first, or anything like the first, just the only one with an unbroken line of descent to all of us (men). So every man alive is his descendant through the male only line (paternal line).For M-Eve many of her contemporaries would have descendants alive today, but all of them had at least 1 male in the link (males don't pass-on mitochondrial DNA) so M-Eve is the only one with an unbroken line of women between her and all of us.Note that neither is our most recent ancestor - that was someone who lived probably much more recently than you might guess - as little as 5,000 years ago.5,000 years - the flood? Noah?
It is such a shame that the creationists are all scientific half-wits because little snippets like this are much better ammunition for them than the crap about the fossil layers. Here am I, on the science side, admitting that we all have an ancestor who lived at the time of the flood (if they ever decide when it was for sure :-) )I'm going to leave that in the air for the creationists to ponder and consider. Will they accept that genetics is a useful dating tool if it shows them something that they might find useful, rather than something that constantly knocks them back....? I wonder.......PS Mr Mod...I did deliberately detour a little, but only so I could arrive at this destination which I hope you agree is on-topic....?Edited by Bikerman, : Appeal to mod about being on or off-topicEdited by Bikerman, : No reason given.

The thing that those supporting the Biblical Flood need to find is that genetic bottleneck signature in every living species that marks to the same (fairly recent) date.The fact is that the Bible Flood myths do give us a few specific pieces to test. As I pointed out many, many times over the years here at EvC, the one consistent thing in the different Flood myths in the Bible is that a whole lot of critters get killed and only the critters on the ark survive.If that story is true we MUST see a genetic bottleneck marker in EVERY species of bird, every human, every critter on land and all the markers must point to the same period of time.Now that marker would be great support for the flood. It does not prove there was a flood (it could have been some other catastrophe) but it certainly would add some support.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

But you know the normal tactic - they will say that 'kinds' are not the same as 'species' and therefore the DNA inheritance is different because the chromosomes contain different gene sequences than if we were evolved.
In fact that is a paraphrase of what the last creationist told me, and I think I have put it rather better and more coherently than she did (she claimed to be a graduate biologist).That argument doesn't work because it is complete gibberish, but it doesn't apply to us because we are, by the creationists insistence, a single species. :-)So all the creationists have to do is prove they understood what I posted and use it to make a case...talk about loading the gun before handing it to the opponent....

quote:

---

That argument doesn't work because it is complete gibberish, but it doesn't apply to us because we are, by the creationists insistence, a single species. :-)

---

Arguing that Noah's Ark contained only representatives of the Creationist "kinds" rather than species is a dodge to reduce the number of animals that need to be on board. But it makes the genetic bottleneck problem even worse. Instead of having to deal with only the genetic diversity of one species (already too high) they need to deal with the genetic diversity of the entire group of species considered to be in the same "kind" (even higher).

They can try that but...regardless, if the Bible story is true then still all living land critters and all the flying critters would still be descended from the survivors on the ark.They can try and pull the Super Genome ploy but that was killed off by Oetzi.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

But you are arguing rationaly using the scientific method. Do you honestly thing that a creationist would concede much of that? Let me change mode
Woodmorappe clearly shows how the ark was built so we know how many types there were. Obviously the genetics are wrong because they show species where non existed. We know what species existed because they were the 'kinds' mentioned in the bible.
The scientist Jason D Browning. using Woodmarappe's research shows that the evidence for the flood is overwhelming: TurnPike Web Hosting Services and E-Commerce Solutions by Crystal Lust
The notion that we can trust the genetic predictions made by people who don't even know how many species there were is silly. We know what we need to know from the bible...

Ahh back.....now, isn't that more what you really expect to get, only probably less well argued? :-)

First off, your allegation that creationists claim to be able to date the earth is not necessarily true. Many of us are not YECs. I lay no claim to know the age of the earth. The Biblical record does not tell us.As for the Noaic Flood, 4350 years ago is likely close. It has long been my contention that due to unknowns such as earth's position, earth's atmosphere, earth's topology, earth's chemical properties, etc relative to a pre-flood planet, the factors which determine modern dating data likely render it impossible to date anything near flood or pre-flood.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Fortunately, there is no need to know anything about conditions before or even during the Biblical Flood. If the Biblical Flood myths are true then the genetic bottle neck marker must be there in every human, every land animal, every bird alive today.That marker is NOT there.The Biblical Flood myths are refuted.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

And we should see the same in all flora as well.Also, we should see some form of discontinuity in sediment profiles of that age (we don't).We should see some massive discontinuity in Native American cultures at that age (we don't).Related to your point, we should see a change in mtDNA profiles between 5-10,000 years ago and living descendants in the same areas (we don't).The evidence against a global flood is overwhelming. The evidence for a global flood is all but non-existent.Legends are not evidence unless they are specific enough to unambiguously associate them with specific events. And when those legends are contradicted by a massive amount of empirical evidence they simply have to be dismissed as myths.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Yes I know you say you are not a YEC that's why the word 'if' appeared. In fact I've said what I think you are in another thread - a dispensationalist.
Believe in endtime prophecies, emphasis on Revelation, hidden meanings about Israel - classic dispensationalist.

quote:

---

As for the Noaic Flood, 4350 years ago is likely close. It has long been my contention that due to unknowns such as earth's position, earth's atmosphere, earth's topology, earth's chemical properties, etc relative to a pre-flood planet, the factors which determine modern dating data likely render it impossible to date anything near flood or pre-flood.

---

LOL have you any idea how ridiculous that is?
1. I believe in the flood
2. I believe it was at 4350BCE
3. The evidence says otherwise
4. Therefore there must be some hidden variable solution which accounts for it all.Dude. The way to reconcile the accounts is simple. Yours is imaginary.
Erath's topology? hehehehe
Chemical properties? don't...please...you are killing me...this is classic....
earth's position? ...WHHAAAHHH...you've peaked....I could give you some basic lessons in fallacies like begging the question, appeal to ignorance, assertion from ignorance etc but it's better if I don't and have the occasional giggle instead. This one is definitely going into my collection on my site...congrats...

My assumption would be that that the alleged creationist pre-flood super climate affected Biblically acclaimed very long life and would implicate limited gene drift. According to the Genesis record, life expectancy was constant until the Noaic Flood, after which it began to lower.How would a genetic bottleneck be effected, given no pre-flood genetic data was known.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

LOL. It should, given no Genesis Flood assumed.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

There is no need to have it even though in reality we do also have that, in fact we have what would likely be one of Adam's kids genetic data as well as genetic data from at least four other humans, several different animals, lots of plants. We have lots of genetic data for the people before the flood and that data has been presented to you many times as well.Your assumption is simply refuted, wrong, false, untrue. If you want we can return to that thread yet again as well.BUT we don't need that as I have explained to you. All we need is the information given in the Biblical Noahic Flood myths. A genetic bottleneck is totally unrelated to any of the pre-flood nonsense you fantasize about; the only thing the bottle neck is related to is that every living critter on land, every flying thing, is descended from the populations on the ark.I will repeat it yet again for you.

quote:

---

In the version of the myth found in Genesis 6 God instructs Noah to:

​

quote:

---

19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."

---

​

In the version of the myth found in Genesis 7 we see similar (close but not the same) instructions:

​

quote:

---

2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.

---

​

We also find similar explanations of what will be destroyed in Genesis 6 it says:

​

quote:

---

7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthmen and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airfor I am grieved that I have made them."

---

​

and in Genesis 7:

​

quote:

---

4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."

---

​

In both myths lots of critters get killed, in the myth found in Genesis 6 it seems to be talking about land animals and birds while the myth found in Genesis 7 goes even further and wipes out all living things.

​

If we play mix and match and take the best scenario from each of the myths we might be able to claim that only the birds and land animals were wiped out based on the passage from the Genesis 6 story and that we have the larger saved population found in Genesis 7.

​

Based on that mix and match game set we have a situation where all land animals and birds found today will be descended from a population that consisted of at most fourteen critters (seven pairs of clean animals and birds) and at worst case four critters (two pair of unclean animals).

​

Now that is what I would call a real bottleneck.

​

We know we can see bottlenecks in the genetic record; a great example is the one in Cheetahs but we even see them in the human genome and most other species.

​

BUT...

​

If the flood actually happened we would see a bottleneck in EVERY species of animal living on the land and EVERY bird and EVERY one of the bottlenecks show up in the SAME historical time period.

​

Talk about a big RED flag.

​

That bottleneck signature would be something every geneticists in the world would see. It would be like a neon sign, Broadway at midnight on New Years Eve. It would be something even a blind geneticist could see.

​

So it seems to me to be a very simple test that will support or refute the Flood.

​

If that genetic marker is there in EVERY species living on land or bird of the air, then there is support for the flood. It does not prove the flood happened but it would be very strong support.

​

If on the other hand that genetic marker is NOT there, then the Flood is refuted.

​

That genetic marker is NOT there.

​

The Biblical Flood has been refuted.

​

Buz writes:

​

You are assuming a relative uniformity which necessarily assumes the impossibility of a global flood.

​

That of course is simply untrue. Nothing in my Genetic Marker test assumes uniformity. The only assumptions are that the Bible accurately describes what the Biblical flood would have been like.

​

And the evidence shows that the Biblical Flood never happened.

​

Fact.

---

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

We have a lot of "pre-flood" genetic data, or at least genetic data from earlier than 4,350 years ago.I have some from my own archaeological research, dated to about 5,300 years ago. It matches living individuals in the same area, showing that there was no disruption at the date you accept for a global flood.This by itself is evidence that there was no global flood about 4,350 years ago.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

I have to ask: do you even know what is meant by bottleneck? IF the flood account were factual, for EVERY LIVING ORGANISM ON EARTH, the genetics would trace back to TWO parent individuals 4350 years ago (or whatever time frame you wish to ascribe said flood to). However, that simply isn't the case, as others have repeatedly shown you. Pre-flood super-climate (whatever the hell that is) has NOTHING to do with it. The genetics of anyone pre-flood is unnecessary.Let me explain it in terms you may understand: take your family tree. Suppose (for arguments sake only) that Noah was YOUR great grandfather. Your lineage would lead to Noah, correct? Any DNA samples would lead to Noah. All of your genetics would lead to Noah. Your children's would lead to Noah. YOUR great-grand-children would lead to Noah. THEIR great-grandchildren would lead to Noah. Such SHOULD be the case for EVERY LIVING ORGANISM ON THE PLANET had your flood happened. This is NOT the case. The lineage for EVERY LIVING ORGANISM ON EARTH should lead to two parent individuals 4350 years ago. This just is NOT the case, now is it?Does that make it easier to understand?Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

---