Atheist challenge #2

Adam,
Much has been made of the genetic bottleneck that would have occured during the great flood. Another has been the whole mitochondrial Eve/faster evolution of mito sequences so that, according to creationists, the 'real' mitochondrial Eve is only 6,000 years old. Explain to me then:

1. Why would the mitochondrial Eve date back 6,000 years and not 4,500 years to the bottlenecking event at the flood.

2. Why doesn't the Y chromosome Adam not match with the mitochondrial Eve in age, and why doesn't he date back to the flood 4,500 years ago (only Noah and his sons survived so Noah would be the most rescent common anscestor).

3. Since we have such a system that determines a most recent common anscestor using either the Y-chromosome (or Z chromosome in insects)
and the mitochondria, why haven't creation scientists used these techniques to show a bottleneck event 4.500 years ago during the great flood, when ALL animals would have had to have had only a single pair of anscestors?

__________________
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

I have a question Adam.

What is the definition of the word "kind?"

Thank you.

Hey folks,

what part of one or two posts a day didn't I iterate well enough. Two pages and ya'll haven't even read the link because I goofed. Peter is the only one here who I know has already read the link and asked a question he knew wasn't addressed there.... The link is fixed. 

Seebs,

the subject is Noahs ark for now, please read the OP.

Mechanical Bliss,

I know post 37 was Humanista's, please read my words closely..."I'll start with THE LAST COMMENTS I READ(post#37 from tacokids thread) ABOUT NOAH'S ARK not being a scientifically feasible situation."

__________________
Adam 332

Okay, Noah's ark.

How many land animals were on the Ark?

How long after the Ark landed was it before there were enough cattle and sheep for people to eat meat again?

__________________
Save me / And when you see me strut / Remind me of what left this outlaw torn
I follow Christ; therefore I am
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
. I affirm the Nicene Creed.
For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. -- Romans 8:38-39

Because some of the wives of Noah's sons were not in the same line as Noah's wife?

One question. The Bible says that a dove return with an olive branch after the flood had ended. Where did the olive tree come from? If the entire world was flooded, there couldn't have been a tree left ANYWHERE.

The Noah's Ark story is obviously a myth.

__________________
A perfect world is a world without children.

I assume the tree was just a little moist, having been under water for 40 days.

Now, when I overwater a plant, it dies within a month, but maybe God's got a green thumb.

__________________
Save me / And when you see me strut / Remind me of what left this outlaw torn
I follow Christ; therefore I am
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
. I affirm the Nicene Creed.
For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. -- Romans 8:38-39

That's because I've never seen it addressed anywhere (nor the other questions I asked; with the exception of the flood waters, although what explanations I've read conveniently leave out the laws of physics).

I've asked some of these before, and unfortunately, the only answers I ever get always involve Divine intervention. But if you want to convince me this was a real-world event (and relatively recent one, at that), then I need a better explanation.

Pete,

thanks for re-posting your question here.

Ever consider many of the different kinds of animals did not survive for that very reason.

Or that this event was the turning point in the allowance for man to eat meat, so was it at this time that animals began to eat meat as well?

We have Biblical reason to believe that before the fall there was no death yet there were plenty of animals. Sin brought upon all kinds of changes into the world, not just to man. The very ground was cursed, and in a sense violent where it had not been previously. Maybe this was God's design that this event was the turning point for meat eating. Even though we eat meat, we don't do so exclusively. So if this was the point which these freed animals released upon the ravaged world began to eat meat, there would be species lost. But these animals were hungry, and if it had been their nature to eat vegetation wouldn't they eat it, just as they might follow their new nature to eat meat as well? Essentially willing to eat whatever they could. IOW an animal doesn't have to chase a plant, so if the were hungry and still had any inclination to vegetation, a plant would be the easiest food to eat.

We see God's supernatural influence on the animals by their procession into the ark at the established time, it is just as logical to consider that God's influence was still at work after the ark was opened. Controlling His creatures to ensure it's repopulation.

The animals proceeding into the ark in such a fashion presents the same scientific questionability as their survival in the post flood conditions. Supernatural work of God may be the only explanation, for both.

Regardless of the amount of scientific evidence I might dig up to answer the many questions I suredly will face on this subject, there will be those for which no scientific data can explain. We are talking about spiritual issue of creation, design, wrath, judgment, etc... which all have supernatural overtones. This in itself will leave one hard pressed to scientifically refute EVERYTHING.

I am not pulling a Tacokid copout, I just want us to all be clear, that to an extent the supernatural explains itself by mere definition.

Here's what appears to be some answers...

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home...mtsthelens.asp

http://www.creation-science-prophecy.com/biology/

__________________
Adam 332

Seebs,

man didn't eat meat before the flood.

__________________
Adam 332