Evolution Primer

[ApplePie7]

This is not the criteria used by science to describe reality. Sorry--it just isn't. If you'd like this to be criteria for something, you will have to call it something other than science.

False.

This criteria is a mainstay by the scientific community.

Take for example the hot inflationary model for the Big Bang…there are numerous competing models, however, the one that requires the least amount of fine tuning will be considered to be the most accurate.

Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam lived at 50k-80k years apart.

Of course.

Females date their lineage Eve.

The male lineage is shorter due to only being traceable back to Noah and his family as all other humanity was exterminated.

Eve alone, being 140k years old, is far older than the oft quoted age of the earth predicted by the Bible (or so it is claimed--the Bible itself doesn't directly offer an age but is derived through interpretation, the same all so called predictions).

We would predict Eve to be traceable back to a later date.

Further, the Holy Bible never instructs the reader to sum the genealogies listed, as there are provable gaps in the listed generations to begin with.

Neither are in any way associated with the origins of the human species. In the same way that mitochondrial and Y-chrom DNA is derived, you can derive the gene-genealogy for any gene found in the population today, and it will not lead you back to either of these two individuals. You are making a retroactive interpretation of scripture, on par with the examples I offered earlier. I refer again to the criteria of adequacy.

Nothing is retroactive.

There can be no denial that the Holy Bible predicted humanity came from one male and one female.

Science has also come to this conclusion.

 

[dewaddict84]

Life extinction occurred during the late heavy bombardment of the earth when it was pelted by debris and melted the earth's surface - such collsions we can easily see on the moon even today.

Well it's a little unclear how many years ago the "late heavy bombardment" you're talking about was. But the moon, mercury, mars, and other such bodies in space that don't have an atmosphere are regularly pelted with meteors and such. This leaves craters that last a long time. Meteors hit earth too, but most of them burn up due to the high friction against the air as they fall. Also, they don't cause a significant amount of heat, certainly not enough to "melt the earth's surface". Whatever that means.

Early life has been trapped in ancient zircon crystals, dating back billions of years. Carbon 13 to 12 ratio dating is used on the trapped carbon in the crystals - which informs us that not only did life exist on an early volatile earth, but that it was abundant life, as well.

I think you got this from some news stories from back in July '08. Mr. Scientists said it MAY contain compounds found in life. Since it didn't shock the world and answer the origins of life, it may have just been contaminated. Or they're still working on it. Or they needed a grant and generated some media buzz. But anyway, carbon-14 dating is typically used to determine when stuff died. It only has a valid range of 60,000 years ago. Other radiometric dating techniques can encompass that age, but don't use carbon. Furthermore, it was the zircon which was dated, not the carbon within.

The C13/C12 ratio you're talking about is indicative of how much plant growth there was that year. Growing plants apparently reduce the C12 in the environment, so if the forest had a good year, the ring it formed would have a high C13/C12 ratio. I think that's where you pulled "abundant" from.

 

[ApplePie7]

Well it's a little unclear how many years ago the "late heavy bombardment" you're talking about was.

Circa 4 Billion years ago...

But the moon, mercury, mars, and other such bodies in space that don't have an atmosphere are regularly pelted with meteors and such. This leaves craters that last a long time. Meteors hit earth too, but most of them burn up due to the high friction against the air as they fall. Also, they don't cause a significant amount of heat, certainly not enough to "melt the earth's surface". Whatever that means.

Billions of years ago the debris in our newly forming solar system was far more concentrated, with major collisions being the name of the game....so much so that it turned the surface molten.

I think you got this from some news stories from back in July '08. Mr. Scientists said it MAY contain compounds found in life. Since it didn't shock the world and answer the origins of life, it may have just been contaminated. Or they're still working on it. Or they needed a grant and generated some media buzz. But anyway, carbon-14 dating is typically used to determine when stuff died. It only has a valid range of 60,000 years ago. Other radiometric dating techniques can encompass that age, but don't use carbon. Furthermore, it was the zircon which was dated, not the carbon within.

The C13/C12 ratio you're talking about is indicative of how much plant growth there was that year. Growing plants apparently reduce the C12 in the environment, so if the forest had a good year, the ring it formed would have a high C13/C12 ratio. I think that's where you pulled "abundant" from.

There have been numerous studies on early carbon deposits locked in zircon crystals.

All of these studies clearly indicate the obvious - that abundant life occured early during earth's history, at a time when the earth was still unfit for life.

 

[dewaddict84]

Whoa, 4 billions years ago! Yeah, that's like when the earth formed. Heavy bombardment, molten surface, right. Sorry I was behind a step. Anyway, it's not quite so obvious.
as per science news:
“If the light carbon signature is from life, then this is very big indeed,” says Craig O’Neill, a geoscientist at Macquarie University in Sydney. “The trouble is, there are quite a few other mechanisms that can form light carbon signatures.”
"We're all a little skeptical," said Dr Martin Whitehouse
That's from not even a full year ago.

So hold yer horses there cowboy. Now, they discover other supporting evidence and this turns out to be true, that'd be amazing. 3.4 billion is the oldest discovered life so far, to push it back 600 million more years, to the time when the earth was forming/cooling, would mean that life could pop up in harsher (or at least different) conditions then previously thought. But let's see what you're getting out of this:

Life extinction occurred during the late heavy bombardment

Wha? Where did you get that from? All I can find is a couple guys saying there may be evidence that life might have existed back then. If it did exist, why do you think it died? But hey, sure, it's a reasonable guess to think that life started up a few times before becoming viable and successful.

The fact that we see fully formed life sharing the same building blocks, even after being repeatedly exterminated, shows not evolution - but divine design.

Fully formed? Dude, they found some odd ratios of C13 and C12. And since lifeforms produce C12, it's possible that it shows life was around then. There are other ways that C12 is formed. So the jury is still out whether or not life even existed back then. The evidence for that is marginal. And after that another jury is out if that life died out. Abiogenisis is still largely a mystery. You can't talk about it with authority, because no one can (yet).

and even then, just because life today shares the same building blocks; cells, DNA, amino acids, carbon, quarks, it doesn't mean that's evidence for the divine over evolution. What else would it use? Now, if Humans had a silicon-based system, which is theoretically possible, that would be fantastic evidence that we didn't come from carbon-based monkeys.

BWAHAHAHAHAH, 50 posts reached! I can finally ask for citations without feeling like a hypocrite. So yeah, please link where you're getting this stuff from. I appreciate you reading my posts now.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Where is your falsifiable evidence?

If humans were made out of completely different things than other animals that would be compelling falsifying evidence against evolution.

The use of common building blocks informs us of a common designer.

Owing to changing schools a few times I got a total of 4 weeks of biology in school, so this may be all wrong:


Evolution requires stepping stones
Evolution requires that there were species similar to humans, creation does not. Evolution requires that these species existed before humans, creation does not.

 

[ApplePie7]

Owing to changing schools a few times I got a total of 4 weeks of biology in school, so this may be all wrong:


Evolution requires stepping stones
Evolution requires that there were species similar to humans, creation does not. Evolution requires that these species existed before humans, creation does not.

That's right...

The creation verbs employed in Genesis inform us that although mankind was a brand new creation - unlike anything that came before it - we were still made from pre-existing materials.

Thus, two additional predictions can be made in addition to mankind emanating from one male and one female, and these would be that we should share common genetic makeup with other living created creatures...and that there is no "missing-link" that is responsible for homo sapiens sapiens.

This is, in fact, exactly what modern science tells us.

All predicted thousands of years ago in the Holy Bible.

 

[awitch]

There can be no denial that the Holy Bible predicted humanity came from one male and one female.

Science has also come to this conclusion.

A single male and single female? Shouldn't there be a huge genetic bottleneck then? A single breeding pair is not sufficient to populate the planet.

The idea that modern science is just catching up with the Bible is, IMO, a very ridiculous statement that is frequently regurgitated by creationists.

The idea that a 2000+ year old collection of bronze age desert scribblings is not only at the same level with, but excels past hundreds of thousands of scientists, who spend years of study at universities, and then dedicate their lives to research and experimentation using modern technology is really silly.

 

[ApplePie7]

A single male and single female?

Yes.

Shouldn't there be a huge genetic bottleneck then?

No.

A single breeding pair is not sufficient to populate the planet.

Actually, it is.

The idea that modern science is just catching up with the Bible is, IMO, a very ridiculous statement that is frequently regurgitated by creationists.

The idea that a 2000+ year old collection of bronze age desert scribblings is not only at the same level with, but excels past hundreds of thousands of scientists, who spend years of study at universities, and then dedicate their lives to research and experimentation using modern technology is really silly.

The proof is in the predictive power accuracy of the Holy Bible.

The three predictions already cited are right on the mark....and were made thousands of years ago.

 

[awitch]

Shouldn't there be a huge genetic bottleneck then?

No.

I'd love to hear an explanation of why not, because that's a whole lotta inbreeding goin' on.

A single breeding pair is not sufficient to populate the planet.

Actually, it is.

No, it's not. Again, the issue with inbreeding.

The proof is in the predictive power accuracy of the Holy Bible.

The three predictions already cited are right on the mark....and were made thousands of years ago.

Well, technically, a prediction is a claim that an event will happen in the future, so the Bible's story about the origins of human is not a prediction. It's not even an hypothesis because it's untestable.

 

[ApplePie7]

I'd love to hear an explanation of why not, because that's a whole lotta inbreeding goin' on.No, it's not. Again, the issue with inbreeding.

It’s called geometric progression.

A single male and a single female can easily populate the entire planet.

You, yourself, come from a male and a female, in turn, each of your parents come from a male and a female. This doubles with each generation. You only have to go back in your very own family tree a mere 30 generations and you are into the billions of people being directly responsible for your genetics.

The fact that we have mankind plagued with disease and deformities is a vital clue that mankind has not been around for a large amount of time.

Well, technically, a prediction is a claim that an event will happen in the future, so the Bible's story about the origins of human is not a prediction. It's not even an hypothesis because it's untestable.

What the Holy Bible states regarding humanity is entirely testable and falsifiable.

As it is, the Holy Bible states that we came from one man and one woman. With this statement, we can predict that the scientific discoveries will also confirm what was already stated thousands of years ago.

 

[SanFrank]

It’s called geometric progression.

A single male and a single female can easily populate the entire planet.

You, yourself, come from a male and a female, in turn, each of your parents come from a male and a female. This doubles with each generation. You only have to go back in your very own family tree a mere 30 generations and you are into the billions of people being directly responsible for your genetics.

The fact that we have mankind plagued with disease and deformities is a vital clue that mankind has not been around for a large amount of time.

AppliePie,

Is this not a waste of time when more Koranic exegesis is necessary?

I need more of your material in my ministry towards muslims. Please start a new topic with your recent works. Include as many ayahs as possible.

It is most effective when you include the classic arabic, its translation in arabic (tranliteration?) and the english.

 

[awitch]

It’s called geometric progression.

Please elaborate.

A single male and a single female can easily populate the entire planet.

You've already made that claim. Explain how the human species would not extinct from inbreeding, or at least why there would not be a genetic bottleneck. Throwing out scientific sounding terms does not back up your case.

The fact that we have mankind plagued with disease and deformities is a vital clue that mankind has not been around for a large amount of time.

We're those diseases and deformities part of god's design? Strange that a loving god would allow (cause?) an innocent infant to be subjected to such things.

What the Holy Bible states regarding humanity is entirely testable and falsifiable.

Really? Then where are all of the experiments from "research" groups like Answers In Genesis or the Discovery Institute? What experiments have they done? Where are the results?

As it is, the Holy Bible states that we came from one man and one woman. With this statement, we can predict that the scientific discoveries will also confirm what was already stated thousands of years ago.

You are starting with the assumption that the literal interpretation of Genesis is true. You can't base your arguments off of an unproven assumption. That's not logically sound.

 

[SanFrank]

AppliePie,

Is this not a waste of time when more Koranic exegesis is necessary?

I need more of your material in my ministry towards muslims. Please start a new topic with your recent works. Include as many ayahs as possible.

It is most effective when you include the classic arabic, its translation in arabic (tranliteration?) and the english.

I am having trouble finding your material on Wikiisilam...maybe I do the search wrong...no email here, just post a topic.

 

[MorkandMindy]

[/size][/font]

AppliePie,

Is this not a waste of time when more Koranic exegesis is necessary?

I need more of your material in my ministry towards muslims. Please start a new topic with your recent works. Include as many ayahs as possible.

It is most effective when you include the classic arabic, its translation in arabic (tranliteration?) and the english.

OK, I'll hold the fort for AppliePie until Friday

 

[ApplePie7]

AppliePie,

Is this not a waste of time when more Koranic exegesis is necessary?

I need more of your material in my ministry towards muslims. Please start a new topic with your recent works. Include as many ayahs as possible.

It is most effective when you include the classic arabic, its translation in arabic (tranliteration?) and the english.

I am having trouble finding your material on Wikiisilam...maybe I do the search wrong...no email here, just post a topic.

You are correct.

This is a momentary distraction from what I really need to be doing. I sometimes need reminding that there are other like-minded individuals out in cyberspace. Thanks!

Btw…not sure if you have this link yet, but I am in the process of putting the exegesis and related materials in one location, here…

http://www.freeforum101.com/koranicbible/


Suras 86 & 108 are 100% complete…and I am in the process of revamping some older/and/or incomplete exegesis’ on suras 100, 81, 53, 106, & 103…just to name a few areas…

 

[MorkandMindy]

It’s called geometric progression.

Please elaborate.

Well the logarithm of two is about 0.3 and the log of the Earth's population is about 9.6 so that is two to the power of 32, now we started from 2 so if the population doubles each generation then it would take 31 from Adam and Eve.

That is wrong because of the Deluge, and the log Earth pop is about 9.8, OK start with 8 then and it is 30 generations on from the Ark doubling at each generation.

With a tripling each generation the present population would be achieved in 20 generations and with a quadrupling in 16, but slower growth rates stretch the time frame out a lot; a 20% growth gives 123 generations.

A single male and a single female can easily populate the entire planet.

You've already made that claim. Explain how the human species would not extinct from inbreeding, or at least why there would not be a genetic bottleneck. Throwing out scientific sounding terms does not back up your case.

The absence of Chromosomal defects means inbreeding is fine. This could also explain the long lives of the ancients.

The fact that we have mankind plagued with disease and deformities is a vital clue that mankind has not been around for a large amount of time.

We're those diseases and deformities part of god's design? Strange that a loving god would allow (cause?) an innocent infant to be subjected to such things.

Those are due to the Fall when man decided he would be apart from God.

What the Holy Bible states regarding humanity is entirely testable and falsifiable.

Really? Then where are all of the experiments from "research" groups like Answers In Genesis or the Discovery Institute? What experiments have they done? Where are the results?

There's loads of things in the 66 book Bible that are testable. The one about telling a mountain to jump in the sea is on hold owing to rising sea levels (science still hasn't caught up with that one) but the rest still work fine.

 

[MorkandMindy]

The absence of Chromosomal defects means inbreeding is fine. This could also explain the long lives of the ancients.

Mammals have a huge amount of defective chromosomes. If two humans of different sexes mate the hope is most of the defective chromosomes will be matched with good ones from the other mate

so everything will at least work, maybe only half as well, but it will be there, and in many cases it will work just fine.

Two closely related mates are likely to have the same defective allele, so with one on each strand of the DNA the person will be totally 'stranded'.

 

[awitch]

Well the logarithm of two is about 0.3 and the log of the Earth's population is about 9.6 so that is two to the power of 32, now we started from 2 so if the population doubles each generation then it would take 31 from Adam and Eve.

That is wrong because of the Deluge, and the log Earth pop is about 9.8, OK start with 8 then and it is 30 generations on from the Ark doubling at each generation.

With a tripling each generation the present population would be achieved in 20 generations and with a quadrupling in 16, but slower growth rates stretch the time frame out a lot; a 20% growth gives 123 generations.

What the heck to do those numbers mean and do you have some source for this information?

The absence of Chromosomal defects means inbreeding is fine. This could also explain the long lives of the ancients.

Not sure what you are saying. Are you suggesting there were no genetic defects? Pretending them away?

Those are due to the Fall when man decided he would be apart from God.

So god takes it out on infants born thousands of years later? How loving.

There's loads of things in the 66 book Bible that are testable. The one about telling a mountain to jump in the sea is on hold owing to rising sea levels (science still hasn't caught up with that one) but the rest still work fine.

The rest works fine? Really? Leviticus 14:2 -52 describes the cure for leprosy involving the killing of birds and lambs and sprinkling blood and oil on the leper's ear, thumb, and toe seven times and shaving off all his hair. Now, I'm not a doctor, and I didn't go to medical school, but I'm pretty sure that won't work. Neither will a brass snake on a pole cure a snakebite as described in Numbers 21:8.

Job 9:6 says that the Earth does not move, yet it revolves around the sun and spins on it's axis.

I can do this all day, but you get the idea.

 

[MorkandMindy]

What the heck to do those numbers mean and do you have some source for this information?

If you double the population at each generation you get 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, that's times a thousand every ten generations, so it is about a million after twenty and about a billion in thirty and Earth's human population right now is about 6,760,000,000 (wikipedia), which is just short of the 8 Billion you would have at generation 33.

That is a geometric progression.

Alternatively you can skip the math, get bacteria that double every 20 minutes at room temperature, put them with a food they like and watch what happens.

Not sure what you are saying. Are you suggesting there were no genetic defects? Pretending them away?

Humans develop genetic defects fairly quickly, for example the hemophilia that plagued the royal families of Europe started with Prince Albert the consort of Queen Victoria, no one on either side of his ancestors had it.

If Adam and Eve had no genetic defects then inbreeding would be fine because there would be no problems of two defective alleles coinciding in their offspring, but with the defects we have these days that would produce something like a village in Tennessee.

So god takes it out on infants born thousands of years later? How loving.

That's fundamental to Christianity, the sin of Adam is automatically bestowed on all but the salvation of Jesus is only available to all, I never did understand that one.

The rest works fine? Really? Leviticus 14:2 -52 describes the cure for leprosy involving the killing of birds and lambs and sprinkling blood and oil on the leper's ear, thumb, and toe seven times and shaving off all his hair. Now, I'm not a doctor, and I didn't go to medical school, but I'm pretty sure that won't work.

After they've had that a couple of times they stop coming back so everyone just assumed they were cured.

Job 9:6 says that the Earth does not move, yet it revolves around the sun and spins on it's axis.

Job was having a really bad day when he said that.

I can do this all day, but you get the idea.

I know, I'm beginning to remember why I gave up Christianity...

.

 

[SanFrank]

You are correct.

This is a momentary distraction from what I really need to be doing. I sometimes need reminding that there are other like-minded individuals out in cyberspace. Thanks!

Btw…not sure if you have this link yet, but I am in the process of putting the exegesis and related materials in one location, here…



Suras 86 & 108 are 100% complete…and I am in the process of revamping some older/and/or incomplete exegesis’ on suras 100, 81, 53, 106, & 103…just to name a few areas…

FreeForum looks like a great site...although this morning its server went down...I'll try again tomorrow. Thank you.

I reference your material in my ministry and I send people to FaithFreedom. I expect this new site to be secure enough so I can send people to it. Thank you...God bless.