Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 9:09 PM
30 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,095 Year: 9,131/19,786 Month: 1,553/2,119 Week: 313/576 Day: 116/98 Hour: 0/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2021
22
23242526Next
Author Topic:   The Flood, fossils, & the geologic evidence
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 1058 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 316 of 377 (622185)
07-01-2011 2:36 PM


Population genetics evidence?
I am not a population geneticist but I would think that there would be strong evidence in population genetics against the destruction of all human life except for one family 4,000 years ago. Think of the bottleneck created by reducing the human population to one couple and their offspring - even if you do throw in the spouses of offspring.
Replies to this message:
 Message 317 by jar, posted 07-01-2011 2:58 PM deerbreh has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30984
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 317 of 377 (622192)
07-01-2011 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 316 by deerbreh
07-01-2011 2:36 PM


Re: Population genetics evidence?
It is worse than that. The bottle neck would show up in every species living today.

The idea that there really was a flood like either of the Biblical myths is just plain silly.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by deerbreh, posted 07-01-2011 2:36 PM deerbreh has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by subbie, posted 07-01-2011 6:37 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
subbie
Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 318 of 377 (622238)
07-01-2011 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by jar
07-01-2011 2:58 PM


Re: Population genetics evidence?
It is worse than that. The bottle neck would show up in every species living today.

Ah, not if there was new and improved super evolution at work. Interesting how those folk who insist that life couldn't have evolved all of its stunning variety in 6,000 years have no problem proposing that it all happened in 4,000 years. Holy cognitive dissonance!


Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist


This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by jar, posted 07-01-2011 2:58 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 319 by Coyote, posted 07-01-2011 7:04 PM subbie has acknowledged this reply
 Message 321 by deerbreh, posted 07-07-2011 11:26 AM subbie has acknowledged this reply

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 271 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 319 of 377 (622240)
07-01-2011 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 318 by subbie
07-01-2011 6:37 PM


Re: Population genetics evidence?
John Woodmorappe writes:

The relevant evidence clearly shows that Homo sapiens sensu lato is a separate and distinct entity from the other hominids. No overall evolutionary progression is to be found. Adam and Eve, and not the australopiths/habilines, are our actual ancestors. As pointed out by other creationists [e.g., Lubenow], 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.

From: "The non-transitions in ‘human evolution’–on evolutionists’ terms."

Here is a good response:

But what is even more amusing — what if this wonderful bit of creationist “science” was actually correct? It would have the following implications, most of which run contrary to what creationists generally claim:
The change from modern man, i.e., Adam and Eve, to these four species of fossil man took place since the Babel incident, which is usually placed after the global flood and in the range of 4,000 to 5,300 years ago. The change from modern man to Homo ergaster would require a rate of evolution on the order of several hundred times as rapid as scientists posit for the change from Homo ergaster to modern man! This is in spite of the fact that most creationists deny evolution occurs on this scale at all; now they have not only proposed such a change themselves, but see it several hundreds of times faster and in reverse! ...

http://blog.darwincentral.org/...-at-creation-science-part-i


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by subbie, posted 07-01-2011 6:37 PM subbie has acknowledged this reply

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 320 of 377 (622383)
07-02-2011 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 308 by Chuck77
06-30-2011 2:58 AM


End of Self-Imposed Exile
Chuck77 writes:

I say this with as much respect as I can, the only reason this debate has lasted so long is because of the long line of ignorant Creationists that come here that havn't or don't want to realise that Creationism in it's current form doesn't fit into the Scientific method. So when people like myself are new to the whole thing we don't realise this right off the bat. It's like boot camp and you guys are the drill sergants, another crop of creationists every couple months, but that's what keeps the debate alive. Im not conceding that Creationism is wrong, it's just not Scientific in it's current form. So now what? I think a lot of Creation Scientists are lazy because they "know" their right and therefore don't see a need to put forth the effort to try to mold it around the Scientific method. Something needs to change.

While it is the end of my self-imposed exile, I feel I must apologize for my previous behavior in this thread in acknowledging your willingness to consider other viewpoints.

Therefore I am sorry, and with that ask no quarter as to my poor behavior.

As to the scientific facts, I give no quarter. However, I will refrain from posting in this thread unless I personally deem it absolutely necessary.

I leave this discussion to those who are kinder and have more patience than I have recently shown.


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
— Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Chuck77, posted 06-30-2011 2:58 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

    
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 1058 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 321 of 377 (622911)
07-07-2011 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 318 by subbie
07-01-2011 6:37 PM


Re: Population genetics evidence?
Ah, not if there was new and improved super evolution at work.

Maybe the ark got zapped with ionizing radiation which greatly increased mutation rates.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by subbie, posted 07-01-2011 6:37 PM subbie has acknowledged this reply

  
Taikoo
Junior Member (Idle past 2629 days)
Posts: 2
From: USA
Joined: 07-22-2011


Message 322 of 377 (625363)
07-22-2011 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by Chuck77
06-30-2011 4:14 AM


Re: Response to Zen and Taq
hi chuck

hopping in here kind of late, and i didnt read the entire thread.
so i might be repeating something.

As far as the Agate fossil beds, i have been there several times, and have read some of the original research papers on it.

I you would be interested i can give a short but fairly detailed account of how the fossil bed formed.

Basically, it was a drying water hole, much like what you might see in a film from Africa on the nature channel. There is such clear and obvious proof that the deposit did not result from a flood!

Things like the fact that animals died and bones accumulated for at least two years, and that many of the bones show the telltale signs of being scavenged and trampled. So there was neither rapid burial nor did all the animals die at remotely the same time. There are other things, but those anyone can look at and see for himself. And it just is not consistent with a flood.

Whether or not there was a "flood" may be another matter, but one would have to look elsewhere for evidence of it. That place isnt it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Chuck77, posted 06-30-2011 4:14 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by Robert Byers, posted 07-27-2011 1:37 AM Taikoo has responded

    
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 2533 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 323 of 377 (626083)
07-27-2011 1:37 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Taikoo
07-22-2011 4:32 PM


Re: Response to Zen and Taq
I'm not sure of the claimed date of this fossil bed.
Yet there is no reason to see it other then it is.A very special case of a collection of life preserved and turned to stone by a special SINGLE event.
The trampling can just be because the creatures were drowning and panicing. The scavenging might just be minor impulses of some of the creatures to seek food in the disaster or are just biting each other in fear or in the way.
It could all be from a quick event dealing with rising water.
If its below the k-t line.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Taikoo, posted 07-22-2011 4:32 PM Taikoo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 324 by Taikoo, posted 07-27-2011 1:10 PM Robert Byers has responded

    
Taikoo
Junior Member (Idle past 2629 days)
Posts: 2
From: USA
Joined: 07-22-2011


(2)
Message 324 of 377 (626148)
07-27-2011 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by Robert Byers
07-27-2011 1:37 AM


Re: Response to Zen and Taq
I'm not sure of the claimed date of this fossil bed.
Yet there is no reason to see it other then it is.A very special case of a collection of life preserved and turned to stone by a special SINGLE event.
The trampling can just be because the creatures were drowning and panicing. The scavenging might just be minor impulses of some of the creatures to seek food in the disaster or are just biting each other in fear or in the way.
It could all be from a quick event dealing with rising water.
If its below the k-t line.
.............................................................................
Sorry i dont have the quote feature figured out.

The age is about 20 millions years, not a "claimed" age.

When you speak of seeing it as other than it is, you are doing just that.

It was not a "single event" can be demonstrated by the fact that
there are many bones that lay about on the surface for over a year before burial. There was no sudden burial, as shown by the uniformity of the deposit, all of it above and below being very fine grain material as would be carried by a slow shallow river, typical of the flat arid plains of the time.

The bones are not "turned to stone". I have one here in my hand.
The original calcium phosphate (bone) is still present. Some minerals including silica and manganese are now also present, and they are mildly radioactive.

A careful examination of the fossil bed... which believe me, has been done, and there are specimens in museums in many places including Germany...shows many details simply not consistent with your scenario. One being the varied age and condition of the skeletons after death. Another being there was no unique burial event.

The site is a river channel. Waterholes in river channels dry up.
Animals congregate in a drought. Fossils are being formed all over the world, every day, as we sit here. Did you think that EVERY fossil is from one event, a flood for which there is no data anywhere?

"It could all be from a quick event dealing with rising water.
If its below the k-t line."

And how would quick rising water bury them? They would float away.
it could NOT be from a 'quick event" nor from rising water.

All due respect but you dont know the age, dont know that it came 40 millions years after the "k-t" (boundary, not line) and dont know anything about the conditions of the site, but you still know that the
specialists who have put in many many hours of the most painstaking work understand it less than you do at a glance? That really is not reasonable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by Robert Byers, posted 07-27-2011 1:37 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 325 by misha, posted 07-27-2011 2:20 PM Taikoo has not yet responded
 Message 326 by Percy, posted 07-27-2011 4:21 PM Taikoo has not yet responded
 Message 327 by Robert Byers, posted 07-29-2011 12:59 AM Taikoo has not yet responded

    
misha
Member (Idle past 2793 days)
Posts: 69
From: Atlanta
Joined: 02-04-2010


(1)
Message 325 of 377 (626168)
07-27-2011 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by Taikoo
07-27-2011 1:10 PM


Re: Response to Zen and Taq
Don't waste your time with Byers. He's been at this for years. He won't produce any meaningful data and won't produce any testable hypotheses.

Its pretty simple. He says that it all happened in a single flood event but won't produce any scientific evidence for such an event because he's afraid that real scientists will challenge him.

Everything is: They COULD have been buried in a flash flood. They COULD have been sorted out due to the turbulent waters. They COULD have scavanged and slowly picked eachother apart while fighting to swim and stay alive during a falsh flood in the midst such turbulent waters capable of sorting geologic strata churned underneath them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Taikoo, posted 07-27-2011 1:10 PM Taikoo has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18484
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 326 of 377 (626187)
07-27-2011 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by Taikoo
07-27-2011 1:10 PM


Re: Response to Zen and Taq
Instructions for how to quote text from messages can be found here:

http://www.evcforum.net/PresentHTML.php?control=html&s=db...

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Taikoo, posted 07-27-2011 1:10 PM Taikoo has not yet responded

    
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 2533 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 327 of 377 (626391)
07-29-2011 12:59 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by Taikoo
07-27-2011 1:10 PM


Re: Response to Zen and Taq
The date changes things.
this would be above the k-t line and to this YEC dude it means a post flood event.
So it could be from events lasting over a few years and so scavenging could happen.
Still water actions can do anything where segregated flow events are going on.

What happened here was either volcanic coverings or the movement of sediment over the land that covered the creatures to a small depth. then later more movement of sediment would of followed and covered the rest.
indeed the fossils are likely not to have been turned to stone as this happens from great pressure upon deposition like in the great flood.
these later actions are not as powerful and so bones not so encased.

I see these events as happening at most over a few years but probably less then ten years and this about a few centuries after the flood.
So about 2100 to 1900 BC.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Taikoo, posted 07-27-2011 1:10 PM Taikoo has not yet responded

    
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 1833 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 328 of 377 (626698)
07-30-2011 11:13 PM


This is the fulcrum verse which applies to all descriptions of the flood:

quote:
Gen 7/1 And the LORD said unto Noah: 'Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before Me in this generation.

Note the words 'thou and all thy house into the ark' - this refers only to Noah's family and domestic animals. Note the words ' in this generation' - this refers to the people in Noah's environment [not the entire world].

Note also that no wild animals [snakes, tigers, bears] are listed. Note also the exacting dimensions of the boat - they align only with a small group of people and animals. Note the close vicinity where the boat settled when the flood sub-sided: Mount Ararat, not Tasmania.

Grammatically, one must proceed to the nearest and only logical path. Verses which describe all the mountains being covered thus require correct contextual adjustment: to the people of this vicinity, it did appear as the whole world was covered [expressionism], mostly because at this ancient times, people never ventured outside their towns all their lives. Its not like today, where we see an earthquake in NZ on TV and we know this applies to one particular area - this is a very dfferent time period and the writings acknowledge this and appears an astute contemporary work of high order and merit. If, for example, the writings included this as a flood only impacting one corner f the world, it would violate its time period: the people of this time never knew of Tasmania; indeed Tasmania never existed then for all all credible purposes.

For a lesson in true authenticity and credibility, this is the first recording of hisorical factors, such as the mention of Mount Ararat in its correct location, and the pristine engineering blueprints of a boat. Of note aso, the allocation of two animals of each kind shows anticipation of continueing life after the flood [as opposed a conclusion of destruction of the world]; the mention of clean animals [consumable; kosher] caters to forthcoming laws in the same document. This was a regional flood, in an area known for such floods, and is written as if it was done in its contemporary times or via some form of knowledge which is mysterious: a host of scholars and scientists have agreed the names appearing in Noah's geneology are 100% authentic of ts tmes - a factor included in scientific assessments.


    
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 1833 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 329 of 377 (626700)
07-30-2011 11:25 PM


quote:
Chuck77 writes:
I say this with as much respect as I can, the only reason this debate has lasted so long is because of the long line of ignorant Creationists that come here that havn't or don't want to realise that Creationism in it's current form doesn't fit into the Scientific method.

It depends what one understands about creationism. The NT version is very different, more like a Walt Disney view and should not be regarded as the assessment, appearing 2000 years later with no record of its observance or knowledge: the depiction of a 6000 year earth is an embarrassment for those who understand creationism, and it has nothing whatsoever to do wth Genesis when correctly read.

The other problem is that negating creationism does not prove anything, and I know of no scientific alternatives to it - you have not mentioned one. Galeleo did not disprove the flat earth merely by saying it is not credible science - he actually had to prove an alternative - he did so!

Creationism cannot be cast aside so easily. After all, there are only two possibilities how this universe emerged: via a Universe Creator - or otherwise; not bad odds. Please nominate the 'OTHERWISE' scientifically, and be assured I will respond scientifically also?

Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by Nuggin, posted 07-31-2011 12:47 AM IamJoseph has responded

    
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 657 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 330 of 377 (626717)
07-31-2011 12:47 AM
Reply to: Message 329 by IamJoseph
07-30-2011 11:25 PM


The world is not limited to your ignorance
The other problem is that negating creationism does not prove anything, and I know of no scientific alternatives to it

Thankfully what you know has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

The educated are not limited by your lack of knowledge.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by IamJoseph, posted 07-30-2011 11:25 PM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by IamJoseph, posted 07-31-2011 3:03 AM Nuggin has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2021
22
23242526Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019