Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
No one has ever found a skeleton with evidence of great ages.
There are scholars who claim the ages in the Bible are mistranslations.
Not necessarily. The are noting how long that familial name continued. Bear in mind how names and familial lines were applied and traced. As long as an eldest son was born to carry on the fathers name it would be continued in the lineage. Technically, a man named "Bob" could live for several generations. Not the original but his successor eldest son. The use of surnames and numerical qualifiers (jr. II, III, etc) are a very recent western concept.
Milliions upon millions of years are usually required for a full mutation and evolutionary change to become permanent.
Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island. Stanley, S., 1979. Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, San Francisco, W.H. Freeman and Company. p. 41
Formation of five new species of cichlid fishes which formed since they were isolated less than 4000 years ago from the parent stock, Lake Nagubago. Mayr, E., 1970. Populations, Species, and Evolution, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. p. 348
.If a group of predominately red-haired, blue-eyed, fair-skinned people live on an island, almost entirely cut off from any other kind for many generations, before long, the most pervasive traits will be red hair, blue eyes, and fair skin ... can you think of an island where this might have happened?
Ireland.
This is Genetic Drift. Mongols are another example, as are the various polynesian groups. In more contemporary terms, Amish also exhibit Genetic drift. It is part of evolution.
Chi_Cygni, while the problem of ages in your post is fascinating, and does refute the interpretation of the vast ages, the text still has some problems.
1. I have never heard of an independent source for Noah outside Genesis. This is saying Noah was a king, which is not mentioned in the Bible. Now, is the discussion of the clay tablets for real -- do we have the clay tablets -- or is it speculation on the author's part and presented as fact?
2. The article fails to mention that there is an earlier Flood story in the Gilgamesh epic -- the story of Unt-napushtim. The Noah story seems to be plagiarized from that, but this article fails to mention it and acts as tho the story were original in the Bible.
3. The article fails to mention that there are two Flood stories -- the J and P -- that were woven together by the Redactor of Genesis but which can still be easily separated.
4. "The Sumerian King List mentions the flood after the reigns of SU.KUR.LAM and his son Ziusudra. The Genesis 5 list ends with the flood after the genealogy of Lamech and and his son Noah. Lamech was SU.KUR.LAM and Noah was Ziusudra. "
This seems a real stretch. Just because there is a king's list doesn't mean that Lamech and Noah were the kings. There were lots of other people living at the time other than the kings! This is speculation presented as fact and causes me think that the age numbers are also speculation presented as fact.
In the creation mythology of peoples of the mideast and mediterranean regions I believe all have a flood aspect. The Greek, Roman, Etruscan, Cretian, Egyption. Pretty substantial circumstantial evidenced for a flood. From their frame of reference, such a flood would have been global. But the "world" to them was relatively small.
Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island. Stanley, S., 1979. Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, San Francisco, W.H. Freeman and Company. p. 41
Formation of five new species of cichlid fishes which formed since they were isolated less than 4000 years ago from the parent stock, Lake Nagubago. Mayr, E., 1970. Populations, Species, and Evolution, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. p. 348
It takes far lest than millions of years.
CZE
I think Inspired means the resultant difference between populations, such as chimp and human.
Perhaps those fish were speciated but not so far separate that they bore the differences of the chimps and humans?
__________________
"Arguing with idiots is like banging your head on a rock. All you end up with is a headache and nothing to show for it." - Brian H. West (1986-?)
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Bushido, that's too simplistic. For starters, it doesn't give speciation. Or rather, it gives anagenesis but not cladogenesis. That is, it transforms one population to another over time but does not give new species. Ernst Mayr hated this definition, and I agree with him.
"No Darwinian I know questions the fact that the processes of organic evolution are consistent with the laws of the physical sciences, but it makes no sense to say that biological evolution has been "reduced" to physical laws. Biological evolution is the result of specific processes that impinge on specific systems, the explanation of which is meaningful only at the level of complexity of those processes and those systems. And the classical theory of evolution has not been reduced to a "molecular theory of evolution," an assertion based on such reductionist definitions of evolution as "a change in gene frequencies in natural populations." This reductionist definition omits the crucial aspects of evolution: changes in diversity and adaptation. (Once I gave a lump of sugar to a racoon in a zoo. He ran with it to his water basin and washed it vigorously until there was nothing left of it. No complex system should be taken apart to the extent that nothing of significance is left.)" Ernst Mayr, Evolution, Scientific American 239: 47-55, Sept. 1978.
I really suggest that you don't use this one.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
I don't mean to say that all evolution is a change in the frequency of alleles. My only intent was to show that adaptation was the change in the frequency of alleles, the very base iteration of the process, before mutations are even added into the equation.
__________________
"Arguing with idiots is like banging your head on a rock. All you end up with is a headache and nothing to show for it." - Brian H. West (1986-?)
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Oh brother, we can have a FIELD DAY with this sort of disqualification!!
Charles Lyell was a lawyer
Someone else already dealt with Darwin, so I'll take Lyell. Lyell originally entered college for law, but he ended up taking a geology course and became quite fascinated on the subject. He continued his education over the next several years. He learned from people on both sides of the debate - both Huttonian gradualists and supporters of George Cuvier (Biblical literalism). Lyell studied under Louis Prevost for a while, during which time his Huttonian attitude became predominate. Afterwards, he traveled through France and Italy, collecting information for his Principles of Geology.
In the creation mythology of peoples of the mideast and mediterranean regions I believe all have a flood aspect. The Greek, Roman, Etruscan, Cretian, Egyption. Pretty substantial circumstantial evidenced for a flood. From their frame of reference, such a flood would have been global. But the "world" to them was relatively small.
CZE
However, most of these derived from the Babylonian; they weren't independent.
Richard Andre did a comprehensive collection of myths about the floods. It was Die Flutsagen: Ehnthographisch Btrachtet, 1891. Andre had nearly 90 deluge traditions. Of these, 26 arose from the Babylonian story and 43 were independent. He noted a lack of deluge traditions in Arabia, Japan, northern and central Asia, Africa, and much of Europe. He concluded that not everyone had descended from survivors of a single deluge, otherwise the traditions would all have been much more identical and there would be deluge traditions in every society instead of a minority.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
As far as the rest of your post, I've come to the general consensus that when there are two theory's strongly in conflict (that have evidence for them), it's possible that the answer lies in the middle. Perhaps H. neanderthal broke off from the "main" branch, so to speak, and then re-integrated back?
Both neandertals and sapiens descended from H. erectus. The early neandertals and sapiens both show indications of erectus features. However, once they speciated, both the preponderance of the fossil evidence and all the DNA evidence says sapiens and neandertals stayed separate.
Erectus to neandertalis:
Stenheim and Swanscombe, 250 Kya: called H. heidelbergensis but have characteristics of both erectus and neandertalis. Large brows and small cranium ( ~1200cc) but otherwise looks like neandertalis
Petroloma skull (complete): brow ridges and low forehead like erectus but not quite as primitive but not as derived as sapiens or neandertalis. Back of head resembles sapiens. 250 Kya
Ehrendorf in Germany and Saccopestore in Italy: mixture erectus and early neandertals, classed as archaic H. sapiens or H. heidelbergensis.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
Linear Mode
