How do creationists test their ideas?

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I'll ask a second time:

What genetic evidence?

You want genetic evidence of Adam, Seth, Enoch, Methuselah ... who?

The Nephilim?

Frankly, I don't understand what it is you're expecting to find; and I suspect you guys don't either.
How many times do you need to be told that your myth predicts a population or genetic bottleneck worse than that of the cheetahs in not only Noah and company, but in all land life. The lack of that bottleneck is evidence that your myth is just a myth. Not only is it evidence for man's case, it is evidence in over 99.9% of all land life. It is a slam dunk that tells us that there was no flood.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
How many times do you need to be told that your myth predicts a population or genetic bottleneck worse than that of the cheetahs in not only Noah and company, but in all land life.

False and UnScriptural. There were over a Million people on planet Earth when the Ark arrived. They were NOT Humans (descendants of Adam) until AFTER Noah's grandsons had children with them. Genesis 6:4 Does 8 plus a million constitute a bottleneck? Of course not but it does account for today's 7.7 Billion living Humans.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
If the Bible was correct, then all animals would display evidence of a genetic bottleneck caused by Noah's flood. There is no evidence of such a universal bottleneck. Therefore there was no flood and the Bible is wrong.

Done.

Not so, since God is the Creator of both Humans and prehistoric people. The Ark arrived in the mountains of Ararat 11k years ago according to History. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE Human civilization can be traced to the first farming (Adam farmed on his Earth with NO evolution) on our Earth.

Your ideas have just been proven wrong by HISTORY but don't feel bad since the SAME Historical Evidence also refutes the false ToE. Noah was the FIRST Human to take a step on planet Earth.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I didn't know that posting "smilies" was a formal refutation. If so, here's yours. :cool:

You did not follow the logic. Nor did you give a valid argument as to why yours is a refutation. Therefore it fails.

Ask politely and properly and I will go over it with you again.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
False and UnScriptural. There were over a Million people on planet Earth when the Ark arrived. They were NOT Humans (descendants of Adam) until AFTER Noah's grandsons had children with them. Genesis 6:4 Does 8 plus a million constitute a bottleneck? Of course not but it does account for today's 7.7 Billion living Humans.
And here you go waving your hands again:

:wave:
There you go, once more refuted.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
We've been through all this before, haven't we?

If we have, you weren't able to provide any good answers then either.

Then no one would have had time to pray the sinner's prayer.

So? God can only forgive if people telepathically say some magic words?


So God's a polluter now?


The only thing funnier is the outrageous attempts made to explain it.

Do you think God left a scar behind when He took a rib from Adam?

There's a loaded question. It assumes I think he took a rib from Adam in the first place. That whole thing never happened.

Remove what genetic evidence?

God drowned everyone on Earth except for eight people.

Then He blessed those eight people and charged them to replenish the Earth.

Genesis 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

Without that blessing Earth would have never recovered from its population bottleneck.

Interesting that you see it as He trying to hide something.

The genetic evidence is the similarity, genetically speaking, between animals in a population. If the population is reduced to only a dozen or so individuals, then the genetic diversity is reduced, and later on, even after the population has grown back into the thousands or even millions, that lack of genetic diversity is there for all to see. And yet, that lack of diversity is typically not there.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Not so, since God is the Creator of both Humans and prehistoric people. The Ark arrived in the mountains of Ararat 11k years ago according to History. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE Human civilization can be traced to the first farming (Adam farmed on his Earth with NO evolution) on our Earth.

Your ideas have just been proven wrong by HISTORY but don't feel bad since the SAME Historical Evidence also refutes the false ToE. Noah was the FIRST Human to take a step on planet Earth.

This doesn't answer my point at all.

Why is there no genetic evidence of a population bottleneck in all species from the same time?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
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

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,664
51,417
Guam
✟4,896,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Based on whose interpretation?
I'll give you credit and say yours.

But if you disappoint me by agreeing with this remark:
If the Bible was correct, then all animals would display evidence of a genetic bottleneck caused by Noah's flood.
...then I'll say mine.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I'll give you credit and say yours.

But if you disappoint me by agreeing with this remark:
...then I'll say mine.
And you still do not understand what a conditional question is.

How would you test your ideas? A proper test has to have a possibility of failure. It shouts volumes if you have to cheat for your version of God.
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,372
Frozen North
✟329,323.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
But if you disappoint me by agreeing with this remark:
...then I'll say mine.

I already know you believe in an inherently deceptive universe, so the issue is moot. You have a philosophically untenable position. You just need to cross your fingers and hope you're right, because you have no way to otherwise demonstrate it.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,664
51,417
Guam
✟4,896,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
We've been through this, haven't we?
How would you test your ideas?
You can answer this challenge: My Sanitary Challenge

And if you don't want to, then I already gave you a test you can perform here: Flood Physics.
Subduction Zone said:
A proper test has to have a possibility of failure. It shouts volumes if you have to cheat for your version of God.
And it shouts equally voluminous if you treat my posts with contempt.

You're just cheating yourself out of understanding.
 
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
We've been through this, haven't we?
You can answer this challenge: My Sanitary Challenge

And if you don't want to, then I already gave you a test you can perform here: Flood Physics.
And it shouts equally voluminous if you treat my posts with contempt.

You're just cheating yourself out of understanding.
I am not going to one of your epic fail threads where you only demonstrate that you have no understanding. You have no valid test. Your test is a rather stupid waste of time and hypocritically you would not pay for it.

One more time what reasonable test would show you to be wrong? Scientists have to be willing to answer that more than reasonable question. You denigrate your own ideas by not being able to respond.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I can see why.

So in all that I posted, responding to each of your claims, this was the best you could do? A weak insult? I honestly expected more from you. Come on, you can do better. Care to try again, and actually RESPOND to my points this time?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: tyke
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

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,664
51,417
Guam
✟4,896,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So in all that I posted, responding to each of your claims, this was the best you could do? A weak insult? I honestly expected more from you. Come on, you can do better. Care to try again, and actually RESPOND to my points this time?
No, thank you.

Let's see a light bulb come on first.
 
Upvote 0