Evolution or descent with modification?

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Amen, and it agrees in every way with every discovery of mankind. Scripturally, scientifically, historically and genetically, it's God's irrefutable Truth. Amen?

I gotta go with the bible narrative of the flood.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I gotta go with the bible narrative of the flood.

Really? Even though it is extremely clear that there was no such flood? Genetics alone tells us that. You may not know it, but the fact that waking up in a hotel bathroom in a tubful of ice missing a kidney or two is a myth refutes the Flood story.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Really? Even though it is extremely clear that there was no such flood? Genetics alone tells us that. You may not know it, but the fact that waking up in a hotel bathroom in a tubful of ice missing a kidney or two is a myth refutes the Flood story.

You lost me on the kidney thing. :scratch:

Regarding the flood, I said the biblical narrative, not the traditional belief of the flood. There is almost nothing in the traditional flood story that matches the biblical story. So I agree that the traditional flood story can be debunked.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
You lost me on the kidney thing. :scratch:

Regarding the flood, I said the biblical narrative, not the traditional belief of the flood. There is almost nothing in the traditional flood story that matches the biblical story. So I agree that the traditional flood story can be debunked.


I am sure that I did. And perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by the "biblical narrative". At any rate let me explain the kidney argument. In the 70's or 80's it was discovered that all cheetahs are incredibly inbred. So much so that a skin graft, which is a rather risk free organ transplant, from one cheetah to another posed almost zero risk of rejection. As you know human organ transplants are very difficult since unless there is a very close genetic match the body will reject a transplanted organ. That is why there are long waiting lists for transplants. Cheetahs do not have this problem. When DNA analysis became perfected scientist were able to analyze the difference between cheetahs and project backwards. It turns out about 10,000 years ago they went through a population bottleneck that was almost, though not quite, of Noah's Ark proportion. Their breeding population got down to less than 10 individuals. The flood story predicts that not only cheetahs, but all life would have an even more severe populaiton bottleneck. Humans included. The severe inbreeding that the cheetahs were forced to go through by their whisker thin escape form extinction has left them with a poulaiton where any two cheetahs are more closely related to each other than you would be related to your sister, that is if you have one.

If you are interested you can read more here:

Dating the genetic bottleneck of the African cheetah.

That we do not see this is just one more piece of evidence that tells us that there was no flood.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I am sure that I did. And perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by the "biblical narrative". At any rate let me explain the kidney argument. In the 70's or 80's it was discovered that all cheetahs are incredibly inbred. So much so that a skin graft, which is a rather risk free organ transplant, from one cheetah to another posed almost zero risk of rejection. As you know human organ transplants are very difficult since unless there is a very close genetic match the body will reject a transplanted organ. That is why there are long waiting lists for transplants. Cheetahs do not have this problem. When DNA analysis became perfected scientist were able to analyze the difference between cheetahs and project backwards. It turns out about 10,000 years ago they went through a population bottleneck that was almost, though not quite, of Noah's Ark proportion. Their breeding population got down to less than 10 individuals. The flood story predicts that not only cheetahs, but all life would have an even more severe populaiton bottleneck. Humans included. The severe inbreeding that the cheetahs were forced to go through by their whisker thin escape form extinction has left them with a poulaiton where any two cheetahs are more closely related to each other than you would be related to your sister, that is if you have one.

If you are interested you can read more here:

Dating the genetic bottleneck of the African cheetah.

That we do not see this is just one more piece of evidence that tells us that there was no flood.

I don't get the connection to humans. By the time of the flood humans were pretty screwed up, with a huge genetic variation. This large variation would have been carried over through Noah's daughters-in-law, and possibly by his wife.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I don't get the connection to humans. By the time of the flood humans were pretty screwed up, with a huge genetic variation. This large variation would have been carried over through Noah's daughters-in-law, and possibly by his wife.

I thought that you did not believe the flood myth? And don't give me this "screwed up" nonsense unless you can support it. I can see that this went over your head. Populations tend to have quite a few alleles for every genes. Alleles are different variants of gene. For example the gene that determine eye color are alleles. For transplants one looks for as few differences in alleles as possible. Alleles tend to naturally accumulate as time goes on. We can measure how fast they build up. Cheetahs were reduced to a very small population. Since that occurred their population has recovered to an extent, but they have not had enough time to develop the number of alleles that a healthy population has. It is why there existence is still threatened by this ten thousand year old event. If the number of people was reduces to under 10 breeding individuals as occurred to Cheetahs, and that occurred even more recently there would be less differentiation in humans than there are in cheetahs. If the Flood story was true, that the human population was reduced to 8 people, only six of which were breeding, then transplants should not be the problem that they are today.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
I am sure that I did. And perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by the "biblical narrative". At any rate let me explain the kidney argument. In the 70's or 80's it was discovered that all cheetahs are incredibly inbred. SNIP The severe inbreeding that the cheetahs were forced to go through by their whisker thin escape form extinction has left them with a poulaiton where any two cheetahs are more closely related to each other than you would be related to your sister, that is if you have one.

If you are interested you can read more here:

Dating the genetic bottleneck of the African cheetah.

That we do not see this is just one more piece of evidence that tells us that there was no flood.

Not so since the traditional religious story does not match the story written in Genesis. Here's God's Truth as actually written in Genesis.

Eleven thousand years ago, Adam's firmament/Heaven appeared in Lake Van, Turkey in the mountains of Ararat. Genesis 8:4 The canopy on top of the firmament was opened and the solid bottom half of the boundary of Adam's Adam's entire world/Universe was totally destroyed or perished 2 Peter 3:6 and Adam's Earth was "clean dissolved" Isaiah 24:19 in the flood.

It had rained for 40 days and nights and the flood reached a depth of 22.5 feet Genesis 7:20 covering the mountains on Adam's small flat world, releasing the 450 foot long Ark into the Lake as the solid firmament sank. There was NO bottleneck since Noah's grandsons had NO other Humans (descendants of Adam) to marry. They married and produced today's Humans with the prehistoric people who had been on Earth for millions of years. Genesis 6:4 That's God's irrefutable Truth.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Not so since the traditional religious story does not match the story written in Genesis. Here's God's Truth as actually written in Genesis.

Eleven thousand years ago, Adam's firmament/Heaven appeared in Lake Van, Turkey in the mountains of Ararat. Genesis 8:4 The canopy on top of the firmament was opened and the solid bottom half of the boundary of Adam's Adam's entire world/Universe was totally destroyed or perished 2 Peter 3:6 and Adam's Earth was "clean dissolved" Isaiah 24:19 in the flood.

It had rained for 40 days and nights and the flood reached a depth of 22.5 feet Genesis 7:20 covering the mountains on Adam's small flat world, releasing the 450 foot long Ark into the Lake as the solid firmament sank. There was NO bottleneck since Noah's grandsons had NO other Humans (descendants of Adam) to marry. They married and produced today's Humans with the prehistoric people who had been on Earth for millions of years. Genesis 6:4 That's God's irrefutable Truth.
No bottleneck means no flood. What source do you use for your translation?
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
No bottleneck means no flood.

Based on the pre-flood and post-flood narrative it is unlikely that there was a genetic bottleneck. Noah's wife, sons, and their wives likely carried over all if not most of the genetic diversity extant at that time.

Case in point.


These littermates share an Australian Shepherd mother, although neither exactly resembles that breed.

Physical differences between siblings carried on for generations as well as revealed in the story of Jacob and Esau.
 
Last edited:
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

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Based on the pre-flood and post-flood narrative it is unlikely that there was a genetic bottleneck. Noah's wife, sons, and their wives likely carried over all if not most of the genetic diversity extant at that time.
That's what a genetic bottleneck is--in this case eight different genomes.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Based on the pre-flood and post-flood narrative it is unlikely that there was a genetic bottleneck. Noah's wife, sons, and their wives likely carried over all if not most of the genetic diversity extant at that time.

Case in point.


These littermates share an Australian Shepherd mother, although neither exactly resembles that breed.

Physical differences between siblings carried on for generations as well as revealed in the story of Jacob and Esau.
Sorry, but they could not. There are far too many alleles of genes for this to happen.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
That's what a genetic bottleneck is--in this case eight different genomes.

Seven of the eight were likely 'mongrels', carrying the genetic characteristics of perhaps dozens of ethnicities, which would explain the rise of so many differing peoples shortly after the flood. Recall that only Noah was "perfect in his generations" (genealogy?)
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Sorry, but they could not. There are far too many alleles of genes for this to happen.

If alleles are genetic mutations that further reinforces my point doesn't it? Noah's group would have carried even more genetic information.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
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

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I said the traditional myth, not the real story.

What do you mean by "the real story"? What is your version of the flood?


Genesis 6:12
And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted (screwed up) his way upon the earth.
That is a fail. Since the Bible's account is in doubt it cannot be a witness for itself.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
What do you mean by "the real story"? What is your version of the flood?

Traditional vs Real

Large ship vs Three story floating warehouse
Ark a simple structure vs A complex structure
Rain caused flood vs Sea waters
Highest mountains covered vs High hills covered
Noah lone builder vs Many workers
Flood raised mountains vs Preexisting mountains

That is a fail. Since the Bible's account is in doubt it cannot be a witness for itself.

It's the only history we have.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Traditional vs Real

Large ship vs Three story floating warehouse
Ark a simple structure vs A complex structure
Rain caused flood vs Sea waters
Highest mountains covered vs High hills covered
Noah lone builder vs Many workers
Flood raised mountains vs Preexisting mountains

If you go by that standard then the Ark was not needed. That is a local flood, of which there is evidence of. Legends often start out based upon real events. But as I said, the Ark was not needed for that flood. One thing to remember is that real life events do leave real life evidence behind.

It's the only history we have.

Nope, it is not history. It is not even close to being the oldest religious writings. The date of the Old Testament is more recent than you probably realize.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
If you go by that standard then the Ark was not needed. That is a local flood, of which there is evidence of. Legends often start out based upon real events. But as I said, the Ark was not needed for that flood. One thing to remember is that real life events do leave real life evidence behind.

The point is that the water was deep enough to do the job. Regarding the missing evidence, it wasn't that kind of flood.
 
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

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
The point is that the water was deep enough to do the job. Regarding the missing evidence, it wasn't that kind of flood.
The point is that your version first said it was not "deep enough". Any version of the Flood that is small enough not to have left clear evidence is so small that the Ark itself was superfluous. The problems with the Ark are endless. Endless evidence that tells us that it did not happen and no reliable evidence for it. Taking a part of the Bible that should be a morality tale and treating it as if it really happened harms Christianity.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0