Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8994 total)
53 online now:
Base12, driewerf, Juvenissun, kjsimons, nwr, PaulK, Tangle (7 members, 46 visitors)
Newest Member: Juvenissun
Post Volume: Total: 879,401 Year: 11,149/23,288 Month: 401/1,763 Week: 40/328 Day: 40/49 Hour: 0/6

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   What is the basis for a Creationist argument against Evolution?
Inactive Member

Message 26 of 96 (78932)
01-16-2004 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-16-2004 5:15 PM

Re: Both Sides
In Message 24 of this topic, RaSBeY offers the following statistic: "The human sub-group with the highest W value are the 'Plain People,' the Amish and Mennonites, with over 9 children per couple ..." to support his theory that "believing in truth [Christian Creationism] improves one's [reproductive] fitness."

Years ago, I picked up produce from the Plain People of Pennsylvania and Western Maryland. I never once noticed any T.V. antenae, radios, or much else in the way of entertainment other than watching the "birds and the bees" and the occasional Amish Country equivalent of a Hollywood blockbuster hit, "Spring Field Fever," subtitled "Hey, Hezekiah, Come Quick, Beaureguard is Mounting Elsie!" Not to mention that, lacking electricity, a majority of the community hits the sack within a hour past sundown. Add these factors to a strong indocrination in "go forth, multiply, and be plentiful," plus total disregard for birth control, and you have all the makings of huge families regardless of individual sperm counts or female fertility rates.

Come to think of it though, how does this theory of RaSBeY's figure with regard to the gross overpopulation in the Buddhist Orient?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-16-2004 5:15 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has not yet responded

Inactive Member

Message 44 of 96 (79309)
01-18-2004 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by TruthDetector
01-18-2004 6:33 PM

Method of Dating Specimens in Genesis
Dear Truth Detector:

One of the more arcane methods used to date the handful of specimens who were fortunate enough to survive Noah's Flood is to count the tree rings in the huge gopher wood beams that Ron Wyatt found on Mt. Ararat.

Apparently, Ron discovered that the largest of the beams used in the super structure revealed through their growth rings to be in excess of two thousand years old, kind of like the giant redwoods of California.

Mr. Wyatt added two thousand to his 2350 BCE date for the Flood, to arrive at 4350 BCE as the most recent possible date of Creation of homo sapiens. Since this date did not coincide with the date generally acceptable to his pro-Creationist collegues, he apparently neglected to include this information in his subsequent writings.

Literalists are eagerly awaiting the release of a study that is intended to prove that gopherwood trees reflected two sets of growth rings for each year unlike other species. The research is still incomplete, but should be available for publication in the near future, as soon as geneticists are able to clone gopherwood trees using the DNA from the beams Wyatt found on Ararat.

Film on Mysteries of Genesis, TLN, at 10:00

[This message has been edited by Abshalom, 01-18-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by TruthDetector, posted 01-18-2004 6:33 PM TruthDetector has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 01-18-2004 8:25 PM Abshalom has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020