|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,789 Year: 4,046/9,624 Month: 917/974 Week: 244/286 Day: 5/46 Hour: 1/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is Global Population Evidence For Noahic Flood? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
According to Crazy Diamond, natural disasters, etc have never stopped the growth of global population. It has been calculated that from the time of the Noahic flood to the present that the population of the world would be about right.
I have quoted myself from Message 16 since it was deemed off topic in that thread. Buzsaw writes:
CrazyDiamond7 writes:- The real fact is that regardless of disease, natural disasters, wars and famine, human population has never stopped growing. . That is assuming there was no Biblical Noahic flood. Henry Morris , in his book, the Bible Has The Answer. cites why the world population is about right, assuming Josephus's and Ussher's Noahic flood timeline.
quote: ABE: Assuming the Noahic flood, the world's population roughly 2500 years ago would have been eight. Edited by Buzsaw, : Add links and sub title BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13035 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.0 |
Thread copied here from the Is Global Population Evidence For Noahic Flood? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22493 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
CrazyDiamond7 quoting Henry Morris writes: However, the average rate would only have to be one half of one per cent per year to produce the present world population in 4,300 years. If you use a figure of .5%/year then from Noah's original family population of 8 you get a current world population of 16 billion, which isn't very far off. But if you use a figure of .4%/year then you get a current world population of 228 million, which is way too small. And if you use a figure of .6%/year then you get a current world population of 1.2 trillion, which is way too large. I wonder how Morris arrived at the figure of .5%/year? Hmmmm. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
It does not matter how much evidence that there was a Noahic Flood you make up Buz, the Biblical Flood has been totally refuted. It simply never happened as described.
The fact of the matter has been pointed out to you in the past; if the Biblical flood ever happened it MUST leave the genetic signature of a bottleneck event in EVERY existing living thing. Have you ever read the Bible? In the version of the myth found in Genesis 6 God instructs Noah to:
quote: In the version of the myth found in Genesis 7 we see similar (close but not the same) instructions:
quote: We also find similar explanations of what will be destroyed in Genesis 6 it says:
quote: and in Genesis 7:
quote: 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. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Extrapolate with care.
Here's an exercise for you: At birth, I weighed 8 pounds. In 1972, I weighed 190 pounds. In 2002, I weighed 220 pounds. How old am I? For the bonus points: How old would I be if the scale in 1972 was off by two pounds? "I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
I wonder how Morris arrived at the figure of .5%/year? Hmmmm. Pretty much the same way you just did, by playing around with values until one gave him the results he wanted. More specifically, as I described in my "Bunny Blunder" article originally posted on CompuServe in 1991:
quote: In Crazy's topic, Message 21, I already posted my section on population models and why Morris' pure-birth model, the simplest and most simplistic population model, is wrong. I also wrote an appendix which examined the relationship between growth rates and doubling times. A constant rate requires a constant doubling time, but history shows that the doubling times have been getting shorter, which indicates that the growth rate has not remained constant, but rather has been speeding up:
quote: And now that the topic is Morris' human population model, the "Bunny Blunder" section can be presented:
quote: And now you know the rest of the story. {ABE: I should have included the bibliography; Sorry}BIBLIOGRAPHY: E.S. Deevey Jr., "The Human Population," Scientific American, 1960, Vol.203, No.5, pp 194-204. Philip M. Hauser, "Demographic Dimensions of World Politics," Science, Vol 131, 3 June 1960, p. 1641. David H. Milne, "Creationists, Population Growth, Bunnies, and the Great Pyramid," Creation/Evolution Issue XVI, pp. 1-5. James S. Monroe, "More on Population Growth and Creationism," Creation/Evolution Issue XVIII, pp. 44-46. Henry M. Morris, The Troubled Waters of Evolution, 1974, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego. ------------- , "The Young Earth," Impact No. 17, September 1974. ------------- , "Evolution and the Population Problem," Impact No. 21, February 1975. ------------- , The Scientific Case for Creation, 1977,Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego. ------------- , Scientific Creationism, 2nd Edition, 1985, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego. ------------- & John C. Whitcomb, The Genesis Flood, 1961, The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co, Philadelphia. Michael Olnick, An Introduction to Mathematical Models in the Social and Life Sciences, 1978, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Arthur N. Strahler, Science and Earth History: The Evolution/Creation Controversy, 1989, Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY. Warren Weaver, "People, Energy, and Food," Scientific Monthly, Vol 78, June 1954, p. 359. Edited by dwise1, : bibliography
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
It has been calculated that from the time of the Noahic flood to the present that the population of the world would be about right. The calculation is meaningless. It falsely assumes that human growth rates have been completely steady for the last 4,000 years which we know can't be true. You might as well use the depth of the local resevoir to calculate the last 4,000 years of snowfall.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
However, the average rate would only have to be one half of one per cent per year to produce the present world population in 4,300 years.
What evidence is there to suggest that the average rate was indeed 0.5% over the past 4300 years? Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given. It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Jar, this thread is about whether population data is more supportive to the Genesis flood or to Evolution. That's what I want to focus on. Other aspects of the flood should be taken to the appropriate thread.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Buzsaw writes: Jar, this thread is about whether population data is more supportive to the Genesis flood or to Evolution. That's what I want to focus on. Other aspects of the flood should be taken to the appropriate thread. There was no flood Buz. The population data you present supports NOTHING. It is totally irrelevant to either subject. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4216 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
Would you explain to me how these 8 people built the pyramids?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 311 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
According to Crazy Diamond, natural disasters, etc have never stopped the growth of global population. And you believed him ... why? It is a matter of documented fact that disasters have caused reductions in population.
Spot (a) the fall of the Western Roman Empire (b) the advent of the Black Death. And it is a matter of common sense that the human race has never been able to outgrow the resources available to it. In a world where, despite modern methods of agriculture, 800,000,000 people suffer from malnutrition, how much higher could today's population be? How high could it have been before the agricultural revolution? And, above all, how high could it have been before agriculture?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dirk Member (Idle past 4050 days) Posts: 84 Joined: |
Would you explain to me how these 8 people built the pyramids? Well, the Great Pyramid was built between 2600 and 2500 BC, which would be before the flood according to Buzsaw's chronology. And supposedly there were enough people at that time to build it. However, in that case I wonder why the pyramid survived the flood in the first place, which, according to YECs, did have sufficient energy to carve out the Grand Canyon. Apart from the population growth issue, I would also like to see the creationist's model for the recolonisation of the earth. How long did it take Noah's descendants to reach the Americas and Australia? Edited by Dirk, : No reason given. Edited by Dirk, : clarification Edited by Dirk, : No reason given. Edited by Dirk, : tyop
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Here's a factor that neither Morris or anyone that I'm aware of have considered.
According to the Biblical record, living things, including humans lived considerably longer before the flood when there was a totally different atmosphere and climate. Noah lived close to 900 years, if I recall correctly. His sons lived four & five hundred plus. Their descendants lives gradually shorter lives all the way down to Moses who lived 120 years etc. During these years each man, some, if not most, had multiple wives, bearing large relatively long living families, according to the Biblical record. The net effect on population would be a trickling down of the averages from higher to lower. Then too, it was not uncommon for 20,000 to 40,000 men dying in one battle or one siege later on down in time. At some point in time, likely the averages bottomed out to beginning to rise up to the present time. Now let's consider the evolutionist bunny blunder.It should be assumed that any creature capable of reproduction has a sexual drive toward reproduction. This drive is a necessary component of reproduction. Otherwise, t'aint agona happen. Therefore the 1,000,000ers are blundering their way into the low calculations. Realistically, if there's reproduction, there's gotta be the sex drive. You can't just blindly alleged that it took hundreds of thousands of years for the early to relatively early populations to double. In fact, likely they more or less functioned more like a rabbitry than an ordered family as it has been historically so long as records have been kept. We know how fast rabbitries propagate, hopping about from bunny to bunny, impregnating or being impregnated. (it reminds me of the depravity we are experiencing in these end times and how the age old family unit is disintegrating. Bottom line: In spite of the discrepancies and unknowns to each hypothesis, the Biblical model is by far the more logical and likely the more realistic model. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
In fact, likely they more or less functioned more like a rabbitry than an ordered family as it has been historically so long as records have been kept.
It's likey that you're a pig fucker Buz, but we're not talking about likelihoods are we? Do you have some facts? It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024