Summations Only

You have made an enormous amount of unwarranted assumptions about the biblical flood story. Most of the animals that came off the ark no longer exist. The animals that exist today were not on the ark. The latter evolved from the former. As far as which ones survived, none of them lasted in their former states; they adapted to new environments and changed from one form into another.

The date biblical scholars give is incorrect, so my statement is not entirely incorrect. It wasn't 4,350 years ago, therefore no need to suggest anything about hyper-evolution. I did not suggest hyper-evolution. I suggest they all evolved within a span of about 200,000 years. I wouldn't agree with that exactly. I would say that ergaster, erectus, heidelbergensis, and neanderthalensis all descended from adam and eve , but adam and even were not modern humans; they were something else that we do no know about right now. Modern man did not evolve until about 40,000 years ago. It was opposite of what they are saying as I posted above, but your critique of scale still is valid. You are assuming that evolution occurs by darwinian mechanisms. I believe larger scale evolution of the past occurred by different mechanisms. It occurred by loss of existing information, not by the slow accumulation of information added on top of pre-existing information. Evolution at the scale I am suggesting would indeed be impossible under the mechanisms currently observed in the laboratory for what I call micro-evolution. That is because the flood did not occur 4,350 years ago. You just made more unwarranted assumptions. That is all you guys know how to do. You have "brain lock" . It is freezed into position. Another word for it is "closed minded". You have assumed that the flood occurred as biblical scholars said it did. There is no reason to assume they are correct. I can guarantee that your idea of the flood is a crude cariacature of the real thing. All the evidence suggests that what you believe is the global flood is totally false. Since you have no idea what the real flood was, you have no ground to stand upon and declare it is an ancient tribal myth.Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.

What are you sorry about? What biblical flood myths? What genetic bottleneck evidence? What refutes a world wide flood in the last 200,000 years? What doesn't have anything to do with biblical scholars? That doesn't make any sense. What else beside biblical stories would be in a biblical book? Again, why are you sorry?What is a myth? Biblical stories? So the bible is a myth? Just declare yourself an atheist. Why do you call yourself a christian if the bible is a myth? That's great, except I have no idea what you mean by "it". What exactly is that simple?

Why does there have to be a genetic bottleneck to begin with?Here is another problem with your thinking: You are thinking the last 200,000 years according to a total of 4.56 billion years for the age of the earth. So, you are thinking about the animals that evolved since 200,000 years ago according to that timescale. My idea of 200,000 years ago actually corresponds radiometrically to what you would call the start of the archean eon.Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.

The timing of the biblical flood can be roughly ascertained by reading the bible(have you read it, I have many times). You can put it roughly 4000 to 6000 years ago.--theodoricYou are assuming the Ussher genealogic dating is correct. The bible says nothing about the actual age of the earth. The genealogies are not meant to calculate time spans. You are interpreting the bible in a completely wrong way.

I am ignoring biblical scholars; I am not ignoring real scientifically determined facts. I don't have a specific date. I have hunches, but I see no reason to date the earth any older than what the evidence actually shows. Other than radiometric dating, I see no evidence that demands an earth that is older than 1 million years. That would only be a critical point if the evolution of the ancient past occurred by the exactly the same mechanisms that we see today in the lab. I have reason to believe other mechanisms that were much faster were in play.

Did God tell you that the genealogies were the way to determine how old the earth was? If he didn't, then you don't have a leg to stand on. Why should I believe that reading the genealogies as a continuous, father to son list of lineages is the correct way? You do know that when genealogies became long and unwieldy, they would be shortened but still maintained crucial information such as who the ultimate ancestor of a tribe was?

Genetic bottlenecks are a relatively modern phenomena. Most of the original genetic information that God originally created all life with has been lost. When you have that much genetic information that is lost, it is impossible to speciate from a original pair of a species. There isn't enough dna to work with. It is called a genetic bottleneck. You assume that todays quality of DNA in most species is the same as that which existed in the genomes of the animals that came off the ark.

Your facts are uncoordinated.--subbieNice opinion. Got anything else?

Since you guys are the ones charging me with ignoring science, the onus is on you to present facts (not theories) that my views are in contradiction with. Nice little nasty unsubstantiated charge you made there. Care to back it up? I didn't say they were scientifically determined facts. Learn to read, you old fart. What you mean is for mean is for me to start presenting ideas that are accepted by a consensus of science. I cannot present science and neither can you since neither us is in a laboratory and analyzed the data and presented our conclusion in a report. This is a fucking discussion blog your raving idiot.

Bullshit.Genetic bottlenecks are a fact and an artifact of the event and the time it happened.--jar.They are a fact today. You don't have the slightest clue as to whether there were genetic bottlenecks during the time of the ark.

Genetic bottlenecks are a relatively modern phenomena. Most of the original genetic information that God originally created all life with has been lost.Evidence please.---taqNO. LISTEN CAREFULLY all you people whose minds are closed like a steel trap.Genetic bottlenecks occur today. YOU need to provide me evidence that they existed millions of years ago.

It wasn't anything different than anything you said, therefore you are a hypocrite.

Yes, that is true today. You are assuming that what is true today was also true millions of years ago. No, the evidence shows no such thing. It is your biased, philosophically based interpretation of that evidence that leads you to that conclusion. Because there was an actual archean eon. It just did not occur 3.9 billion years ago as you measure years by the suns revolutionary period. It was probably about 200,000 actual calendar years ago.

The problem here is that what I will give you as evidence, you will reject as non evidence. No matter what I say, you will say that I have given no evidence. You won't accept my evidence because you define evidence differently that I do. It is a pointless endeavor unless we are defining the word the same way. There is a second problem here. When you post your evidence, you post it in a way that says "this evidence can only support my conclusion and nothing else". That is a non starter right there. You and most others on this site and in the majority of the scientific community are blind to the fact that you have a strong bias when interpreting the evidence. You have a philosophical commitment that you are blind to. Everyone has philosophical commitments, it is an inevitable part of being human. The trick is to recognize that you have one in order to more rationally analyze the world around you.