Y.E.C. Model: Was there rapid evolution and speciation post flood?

In order to get the species diversity we see today, creationists have proposed rapid evolution whereby in the years after the ark the limited species on the ark both spread worldwide and diversified into all extant species.The implications of this ad hoc rapid evolution idea are ridiculous. As I posted in Message 725 in the TRVE History of the Flood thread:

John Woodmorappe (a pseudonym for a high school teacher named Jan Peczkis), in his article titled The non-transitions in ‘human evolution’—on evolutionists’ terms, posted on the answersingenesis.org website, has argued this very thing. He 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.

​

So Woodmorappe sees the change from modern man, i.e., Adam and Eve, to these four species of fossil man taking place since the Babel incident, which occurred after the global flood and in the range of 4,000 to 5,300 years ago.

​

Homo ergaster is dated by scientists to between about 1.8 million and 1.3 million years ago, so the change from that critter to modern man took at least 1.1 million years. Now creationists propose a change from modern man to Homo ergaster in about 4,500 years (with instant fossilization and burial, along with a return to normal evolutionary rates). This post-Babel change from modern man to Homo ergaster would require a rate of evolution on the order of 250 times as rapid as scientists see for the change from Homo ergaster to modern man!

​

Most creationists deny evolution occurs on this scale at all. Now creationists have not only proposed such a change themselves, but they see it operating 250 times faster and in reverse!

This illustrates the danger when creationists come up with an ad hoc explanation to get around one problem--the down-the-road implications produce even more problems to the point of total unworkability! That's certainly the case with the idea of rapid evolution.

So some creationists have claimed.Scientists see the change from Home erectus to modern man taking place over some two million years. Creationists generally balk at the idea that evolution can produce new kinds in two million years--or at all--but now are proposing that such change can occur in a couple of thousand years.Creationists Lubenow and Woodmorappe write that 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.If this was the case, 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 faster than 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! Unfortunately for creationists, the evidence shows they are wrong about this also.(Oh, incidentally, there was no flood during historic times either.)

How about evidence from decades of archaeology which I have done personally (and professionally)?I have radiocarbon dated mtDNA from before to after the purported dates of the flood and babel, and there is continuity--no change from Native American haplotypes to those associated with the Near East (i.e., Noah's female kin).I have cultural continuity over the same time periods, and consistent stratigraphic layering with no major erosion or deposition that would be associated with a massive flood.What we do have in southern Washington, though, is evidence of the peri- and post-glacial floods (google "channeled scablands"). These are three times older than the purported global flood, and their extent and dating can readily be established. The same can't be said for Noah's flood.And putting the flood at the KT event? Do you realize how much established science has to be ignored or hand-waved away for anyone to believe such a thing?Face it, religious belief is not scientific evidence.

Starman has failed to even try to address the evidence he asked for, and which I provided in Message 432.Denials are not evidence, and religious beliefs are not evidence no matter how firmly they are held.In order to make a case for one's beliefs, there must be some rational evidence and so far we see none from Starman.Perhaps he should try again?

Been done. You're the one who loses.And you're not even amusing any longer. Sure you're not a Poe?

That's a religious belief contradicted by facts.Its so easy to disprove that idea that even my own archaeological research does so. From one project I have mtDNA dating about 5300 years ago which matches younger skeletal samples from the same area, as well as living individuals from the same area. There was no break or discontinuity ca. 4350 years ago (where most biblical scholars place the flood) which would have been necessary if there was a godly inspired genocide of everyone but Noah's female kin.There is also no evidence for a flood in geology, stratigraphy or other fields of investigation in this area, meaning no global flood.