How old is the Earth?

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
HCG wrote:


OK so far......



Simply false. Anyone who is even a little familiar with the genetic evidence knows that Mt eve and Y Adam were never the only people around, that they lived many thousands of years apart (in fact, Y adam is a distant child of Mt eve), and that the genetic evidence has confirmed again and again that the human population was never less than 20,000 to 40,000.
That is a little overstated:

According to the genetic bottleneck theory, between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago, human populations sharply decreased to 3,000-10,000 surviving individuals.[26][27] It is supported by genetic evidence suggesting that today's humans are descended from a very small population of between 1,000 to 10,000 breeding pairs that existed about 70,000 years ago.[28]

Toba catastrophe theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, there was no bottleneck for the Neanderthal, and we are all 2%-4% Neanderthal. (If you're white you'll have more.) Not only did our ancestors diverge and then recombine between Neanderthal and anatomically modern humans 40,000 years ago, there is also clear evidence of another lengthy divergence at 150,000 years ago followed by a recombination at roughly the same time as with the Neanderthal at 40,000 years ago. This second divergence was between eastern and southern Africans.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Human line 'nearly split in two'
 
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
I'm curious, how can you post something that is anti-Christian/Creationist and then claim to be one?
Are you posing as a Christian, a tare amongst the wheat?
How is believing that the universe is not a lie somehow anti-Christian?

The latest polls shows that the percentage of TE's among scientists and the general public are the same, 40%. Calling a TE anti-Christian is just slander.
 
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
True, that. There's an entire world view where naturalism is used to explain everything we see. It's thorough and all-encompassing.
That is because miracles are something special, a gift of grace to a soul. If no souls are around then miracles serve no purpose, so natural explanations are sufficient for everything before souls were around.

If what you are arguing is correct then God preformed certain prehistoric miracles for no other purpose than to make your theories correct. That seems to me like a highly suspect motivation for supposed miracles.
 
Upvote 0

troodon

Be wise and be smart
Dec 16, 2002
1,698
58
39
University of Iowa
Visit site
✟17,147.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I'm curious, how can you post something that is anti-Christian/Creationist and then claim to be one?
Are you posing as a Christian, a tare amongst the wheat?
Anti-creationist =/= anti-Christian

I am a Christian. The age of the earth and the origin of life on this planet do not affect in any way my belief in Christ.

And by the way:

The Rules said:
● Do not state or imply that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian.
 
Upvote 0

Ronald

Exhortations
Supporter
Jul 30, 2004
4,620
982
southern
✟111,578.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Anti-creationist =/= anti-Christian

I am a Christian. The age of the earth and the origin of life on this planet do not affect in any way my belief in Christ.

1. It was a question.
2. If you are a Christian, then you are a creationist!
3. You quoted something derogatory towards creationists in general --which would be a contradiction and slapping yourself in the face. That's why I questioned it.

It's like saying in one breath, "I'm a scientist" and then posting something derogatory against scientists: "Scientists are always falsifying info ..."

I'm aware that almost half of Christians claim to be TE.
 
Upvote 0

troodon

Be wise and be smart
Dec 16, 2002
1,698
58
39
University of Iowa
Visit site
✟17,147.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
1. It was a question.
2. If you are a Christian, then you are a creationist!
3. You quoted something derogatory towards creationists in general --which would be a contradiction and slapping yourself in the face. That's why I questioned it.

It's like saying in one breath, "I'm a scientist" and then posting something derogatory against scientists: "Scientists are always falsifying info ..."

I'm aware that almost half of Christians claim to be TE.
Sure, fine, I'm an old earth naturalistic evolutionary creationist. Feduccia, in that quote, is talking about anti-evolution creationists, so I'm not included.
 
Upvote 0

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
985
58
✟57,276.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Fascinated wrote:

That is a little overstated:

According to the genetic bottleneck theory, between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago, human populations sharply decreased to 3,000-10,000 surviving individuals.[26][27] It is supported by genetic evidence suggesting that today's humans are descended from a very small population of between 1,000 to 10,000 breeding pairs (=2,000 to 20,000) that existed about 70,000 years ago.[28]

Toba catastrophe theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good clarification. Either way, we pretty much agree that the human population was never just 2 people, but instead was always in the thousands. Especially including the Neanderthals. We also probably agree that Mt Eve and Y Adam were not a couple, but instead were separated by thousands of years (so Y Adam was very likely a distant grandchild of Mt Eve, so Adam came from Eve, not the other way around).


However, there was no bottleneck for the Neanderthal, and we are all 2%-4% Neanderthal.

Yes. In fact, I've had my genome mapped at www.23andme.com, and it turns out I'm more Neanderthal than average! I'm at 2.8% Neanderthal, or more Neanderthal than 83% of the population. Makes sense with my mostly northern European (esp. German) ancestry.

Papias


P.S. Kudos to Troodon for un-equivocating the equivocation fallacy that Ronald used.
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟11,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Good clarification. Either way, we pretty much agree that the human population was never just 2 people, but instead was always in the thousands. Especially including the Neanderthals. We also probably agree that Mt Eve and Y Adam were not a couple, but instead were separated by thousands of years (so Y Adam was very likely a distant grandchild of Mt Eve, so Adam came from Eve, not the other way around).

sorry for being thick, but who was Y adam married to, if he was separated from Mt eve by thousands of years? a nearndethal? homo erectus?

i wish they'd make up their minds about human origins, was it a small population 70,000 years ago, or 130,000 years ago?
 
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
i wish they'd make up their minds about human origins, was it a small population 70,000 years ago, or 130,000 years ago?
At least one of the three known population groups of human around at 70,000 years ago suffered a bottleneck, possibly two of the groups. Neanderthal never suffered a bottleneck, but they are only a small contribution to our gene pool.

I've never seen any suggestion of any kind of bottleneck at 130,000 years ago. The only thing that I have seen about 130,000 years ago is that the earliest evidence of sea shell jewelry and extended trading routes has been pushed back to that date.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟27,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
sorry for being thick, but who was Y adam married to, if he was separated from Mt eve by thousands of years? a nearndethal? homo erectus?
Same species as mt Eve, home sapiens. He may or may not have had her mitochondria, it as along time ago so there may have been other mitochondrial lineages still around. He may not have been descended from her, or he could have been descended from her and not had her mitochondia because the line of decent went back to mt Eve through a male ancestor.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ronald

Exhortations
Supporter
Jul 30, 2004
4,620
982
southern
✟111,578.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Sure, fine, I'm an old earth naturalistic evolutionary creationist. Feduccia, in that quote, is talking about anti-evolution creationists, so I'm not included
.
I believe you are a theistic evolutionist. But Alan Feduccia is a strict evolutionist/ anti-creationist and that quote does not differentiate between any type of creationist. Nice try though. You are better off using quotes from your true camp, this guy is not one of them.
 
Upvote 0