Inerrant Bible?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
'there has never been an archeological find that contradicted anything in the bible' (paraphrased I'll provide you with the original, as I said I just read your post).

---

How about the pyramids? 4,500 years old and no water damage from a certain flood.......

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
Hi Joz,

​

Why do you presuppose the pyramids are ante-deluvian? Why can't they be after the flood? D'oh!

​

---

how many people were on the ark?8 was it not?How big are the pyramids?How many man hours went into their construction?Unless Noah en famile bred at a rate that would put most rodents to shame there couldn`t have been enough people....Ergo if the flood happened the pyramids construction preceeded the cataclysm.....D`oh squared back to you.....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 02-23-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
At the time of Christ the population was two hundred million and now it is over 5 billion in 2000 years.

​

D'oh squared times infinity!

​

OH Yeah!

---

Taking the population at the B.C/A.D crossover to be 200 million and using a more accurate figure of 6 billion for current world population....let population in year X be N (the initial pop) * n (yearly rate of population growth) to the Xth power.....So 2E^8*n^2000 = 6E^9n^2000 = 6E^9/2E^8 = 30Taking logs..2000Log(10)n = Log(10)30Log(10)n = Log(10)30/2000Log(10)n = 7.38560627E^-4Thus n = 1.001702046pretty small rate of growth really......D`oh cubed / 0 back to you......

So Theo how do you account for the population needed to build these ante deluvian pyramids?(Because so far its D`oh cubed over 0 on you)

quote:

---

Originally posted by joz:
Thus n = 1.001702046

---

(For the record I am aware of the number of assumptions that are contained below, in all cases I did my best to give a reasonable figure if someone can demonstrate to my satisfaction that a particular variable should be Y instead of X then I`ll go back and rework from that point on...)Lets give it the benefit of the doubt and round it up to n = 1.002(this by the way agrees with your flood was 10,000 years ago statement and is presumeably how it was derived...)Given that the pyramids were built around 4,500 years ago this gives a GLOBAL population of about 473,000.....Lets say they were evenly distibuted between Asia, Europe, Africa, North and South Americas....This gives 94,600 in Africa and an equal amount in Europe, but the Egyptians would not have had access to this entire population, let us assume a figure of 10% of each this gives a total population of 18,920 under egyptian rule....Let us claim an even distribution of ages and claim that 20% are too young to work and 10% too old....lets also assume that 20% of the population were engaged in feeding and clothing the rest and that 10% formed the preisthoods, aristocracy, armies, civil servants, personal retainers of the rich etc.....This leaves 40% or 7,568 people to build the pyramids....I`m having my doubts already.....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 03-04-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
Talk about making something easy complex! Start with the original eight people from the arc and since creationists usually agree with the approximate age of the earth to be about 10,000 years old that would place the flood somewhere around 5000 B.C. Assume Noah and his wife didn't have any more kids and use the three sons and their wives as the progenerators and assume that they each had three children and that each generation had three children every twenty years (generous assumptions on my part, ancient civilizations had as many children as possible and probably at puberty not twenty). That yields the simple calculation of 3 to 25th power which is a possible population of 847,286,600,000 in five hundred years or approx 4500 B.C.

​

Golly Gee, even rounding down because of the possible variables do you think there was enough time for the population to be large enough to produce the manpower for the pyramids? Quantum D'oh

​

---

That requires each breeding pair to produce 3 offspring that each live to produce 3 offspring every 20 years....If you, your wife, your 3 sons and their wives were abandoned in the middle of a vast mudflat how do you think you`d do?What about when cousins start breeding in the first ante delluvian generation, can you say reinforced harmfull recessive resulting in a lethal in womb? How about the women who die before birthing at least 3 children? How about the children that don`t survive long enough to produce 3 offspring?Talk about representing something complex in an overly simplistic fashion.....Diracs delta function (identity - Theo)*D`oh on you!!!!!(Ahh sorry about that 6/3 mixup it was late and I saw Genes asexual reproduction reply first, note however that I have accepted and aknowledged this correction, please do me the same service in a certain other thread....)(Note however I still maintain that the problems above invalidate your model of post deluvian population growth....)

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 03-08-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 03-08-2002]

Q/What do you think infant mortality rate would be?Q/Is this increased dramatically by parents who are cousins?Q/Would it not be more reasonable to assume that such a small population would go through an initial spell of slow population growth as they established themselves?Q/Do you understand that if the rate of growth were slower at the start it affects the 500 year figure fairly drastically...Q/You say that the wives were from diverse ethnic backgrounds, is there any evidence for this? If not why assume it?Ultimately there are numerous reasons why it is unreasonable to postulate that such a small population could grow so quickly, or in the case of cousins breeding at all.....Oh and 3^{number of generations} isn`t the correct mathematical model to use anyway....Humans being a sexually reproducing species your equation should look more like this:N_generation = N₁*(n/2)^generationWhere N_x = population of generation xn = number of offspring per breeding coupleand N₁ = 6 (you exclude noah and wife as they are generation 0 and do not contribute any offspring to generation 2....)

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 03-08-2002]

And now for some maths:Taking the population at the A.D/B.C crossover to be 200,000,000 as you earlier stated and taking the current population to be of the order of 6,000,000,000....If N_5000B.C = 8 then n (yearly rate of population growth is about 1.00341 to get 200,000,000 in 0 A.D this conflicts sharply with the figure of 1.025 found by the each generation growing by 50% over a succesion of 20 year generations....Though an argument could be attempted relating the 200,000,000 population as a maximum limit the fact that current world population is 30 times as large would imply this is not the case....useing our figure of n = 1.00341 we obtain populations of:N_{4500 B.C} = 43N_{4000 B.C} = 241Note that I have data and hypothesis that these rates are mathematicaly derived from you merely postulate a hypothetical growth rate....We have data use it.....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 03-08-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:
1)The discourse is followed by dotings and janglings of merely ‘what-if’ scenarios like where did enough fresh water come from.

​

2)This type of cantankerous doting is not very praiseworthy to support the evolutionist’s incredible faith/biases.

---

1)Its not a "what if" its a valid question, if there isn`t enough water to have a global flood covering each and every last bit of land it stands to reason there wasn`t one....Who said anything about it being fresh water? Salt water is fine providing there is enough of it....2)And where the hell did you learn English? The Don King school of erudition?