- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,850,678
- 51,423
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Do you see a bottleneck event in Genesis 1?
Of course. The creationist myth has a bottleneck. Perhaps you should try to learn what one is.Do you see a bottleneck event in Genesis 1?
I said bottleneck event ... not bottleneck.Of course. The creationist myth has a bottleneck. Perhaps you should try to learn what one is.
Can you demonstrate this bottleneck on paper?Subduction Zone said:The "paring down" is not the important part. It is the very small population in the bottleneck itself.
Two.Subduction Zone said:In your opinion how many people were created by God?
I said bottleneck event ... not bottleneck.
Can you demonstrate this bottleneck on paper?
I'd say it's more like a pyramid, with Adam & Eve at the top, than it is a bottleneck, with Adam & Eve in the middle, and a thriving population on each side of them.
Two.
Actually, AV1611VEt is more right. This is more some variation of the founder effect than a bottleneck:Semantics.
If Genesis 1 is literal, shouldn't we all be inbred depressed, according to evolution?Yeah, it's a founder event, not a bottleneck. If it happened, it happened to some other species than humans, though. Humans are not descended from a single breeding pair within the last few hundred thousand years.
If Genesis 1 were literally true, our genetics would look very different. I don't see any reason that we would be suffering from inbreeding depression, though, since that comes from lots of accumulated deleterious recessive mutations.If Genesis 1 is literal, shouldn't we all be inbred depressed, according to evolution?
According to biology, not "evolution". And as sfs pointed out the result are the same even if the name is slightly different.If Genesis 1 is literal, shouldn't we all be inbred depressed, according to evolution?
Then I'll ask you a second time:According to biology, not "evolution". And as sfs pointed out the result are the same even if the name is slightly different.
You are the one that keeps proposing that we would be depressed and terribly inbred.
Then I'll ask you a second time:
What evidence are you saying we should have concerning a literal Genesis 1 creation?
I say: "none".
What say you?
Your sentence is missing a verb.We should genetic evidence for a rapid increase in population size.
In what way?If Genesis 1 were literally true, our genetics would look very different.
Such as finding what?We should [find] genetic evidence for a rapid increase in population size.
So do I, but for the record, this thread is an even tougher one: the earth's population at only just two people.No... I see the bottleneck even in Genisis Chapter 7 .. With Noah His family and the great flood..