Creationists: can you explain post-Flood repopulation? (2)

[AV1611VET]

I didn't know anyone actually believed
that stuff, before I went to the USA for Uni.

You know, we love our dragons here,
but don't exactly expect to see a real one.

We observe the regressive anti- education,
anti intellectual culture of Afghanistan and
recognize the effect it has on the nation.

Such cannot be good for the future of America
either.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I’ll leave that question for readers to answer. I can not comment on the details of the CMI model, but I can give details of my own model where we go from eight people to 12 million people in 250 years:

• 48% of births are male, 52% are female
• The CMI model checks to see if a woman is married before allowing her to become pregnant. I don’t bother with that; I just assume that, in light of the people obeying Genesis 9:1 and Genesis 9:7, any woman who becomes widowed or divorced is married with someone else right away. There’s a reason men had multiple wives in ancient times: It allowed every woman a chance to become pregnant.
  
• All women between the ages of 14 and 40, if not pregnant, have an 8% chance of becoming pregnant every week.
• Every week a woman is pregnant, there is an 0.2% chance of her having a miscarriage, so roughly 8% of pregnancies have a chance of not coming to term.
• A woman gives birth 40 weeks after getting pregnant.
• There is a 5% chance of having twins, and a 0.05% chance of having triplets
• Any week, for every single man, woman, and child in the population, there is a 0.1% chance that person will die.
• To avoid inaccuracies that the CMI model has, which only updates the population once a year, the population is updated every week in the model.
• Every year has precisely 52 weeks.

I asked about the CMI model and reasonableness of *its* assumptions, not your model. (Though the assumptions about female fecundity seems wildly off. I'm not sure how you can justify those assumptions.)

 

[Hans Blaster]

At least the obnoxious Kent Hovind isn’t around any more after being arrested.

Oh, if only it were true. Not only was he arrested, but convicted, jailed and freed. He makes videos regularly on YouTube. I will not aid and abet subjection of any innocent (or guilty) persons to his content.

 

[Astrid]

Oh, if only it were true. Not only was he arrested, but convicted, jailed and freed. He makes videos regularly on YouTube. I will not aid and abet subjection of any innocent (or guilty) persons to his content.

Can you send him to the Russians?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Can you send him to the Russians?

I think it would be cheaper to put him on a raft and push it toward Cuba. He'd not like that plenty well enough.

 

[AV1611VET]

Can you send him to the Russians?

I think it would be cheaper to put him on a raft and push it toward Cuba. He'd not like that plenty well enough.

Science breeds hostility, doesn't it?

 

[samiam]

I asked about the CMI model and reasonableness of *its* assumptions, not your model.

You would have to contact the CMI or the paper’s authors, since the paper describing the model is somewhat vague and that’s all we can go on.

Though the assumptions about female fecundity seems wildly off. I'm not sure how you can justify those assumptions.

In the model, every woman has, on average, just under 10 children. This is a high number, but not completely out of line compared to, say, mid-20th century Latin America, where some women would have a clock on the wall, and for each number of the clock, they would have a picture of one of their kids.

But, yes, it would take 643 years to go from 8 people to 5,000,000 people using the highest observed world-wide human population annual growth rate.

 

[Shemjaza]

Science breeds hostility, doesn't it?

I prefer, you reap what you sow.

 

[AV1611VET]

I prefer, you reap what you sow.

So would I, but we sow wheat and reap tares.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

I think it would be cheaper to put him on a raft and push it toward Cuba. He'd not like that plenty well enough.

And his son, please (Eric).

 

[Hans Blaster]

And his son, please (Eric).

Nah. Eric seems a decent enough fellow with actual kindness towards others. Kent on the other hand is a nasty piece of work: serial spousal abuser, tax cheat and fraudster, academic fraud, etc. In Kent's post-prison YT channel (from the few clips I've seen) he routinely bashes his perceived enemies and takes delight in such. No, Kent is a bad person.

If evangelical creationism's biggest PR problem was Eric Hovind, then they'd be doing about as good as they possibly could.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, Kent is a bad person.

Did Kent send seven astronauts to aitch, despite warnings to the contrary?

Did Kent make fun of a woman who demanded further tests on a prenatal wonder drug?

Did Kent rig a vote -- (or participate in a rigged vote) -- to get his agenda through the system?

Was Kent prosecuted for telling a community of commoners it was safe to go back to their homes?

Would Kent -- or even YOU -- take a joy ride in an airship filled with hydrogen?

Did Kent equip an ocean liner with only half the amount of life boats required in case of an emergency?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Did Kent send seven astronauts to aitch, despite warnings to the contrary?

Did Kent make fun of a woman who demanded further tests on a prenatal wonder drug?

Did Kent rig a vote -- (or participate in a rigged vote) -- to get his agenda through the system?

Was Kent prosecuted for telling a community of commoners it was safe to go back to their homes?

Would Kent -- or even YOU -- take a joy ride in an airship filled with hydrogen?

Did Kent equip an ocean liner with only half the amount of life boats required in case of an emergency?

Bravo AV, at least I know you didn't cut-and-past your list of anti-science grievances this time. Nice work on the formatting.

No, Kent has his own crimes for which he has been charged: Tax evasion, money laundering (structuring), and spousal abuse.

As for me, sure, if it was one of those "Lead Zeppelins" I've been hearing about.

Why do you assume the Challenger 7 are in Hell? Is it because they dared pierce the firmament?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why do you assume the Challenger 7 are in Hell? Is it because they dared pierce the firmament?

Just so you know, Heaven starts with aitch as well.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Just so you know, Heaven starts with aitch as well.

Is that why you bowdlerized it? Because you don't want to use the infamous H-word "heaven"? I don't buy it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is that why you bowdlerized it? Because you don't want to use the infamous H-word "heaven"? I don't buy it.

I don't go around saying everyone went to Heaven, and I don't go around saying everyone went to Hell.

I'm not the Judge.

 

[Astrophile]

It would take about 1,100 years to reach today's population at the current 2% population increase rate of today from 6 people.

This argument appears to imply that Noah's flood occurred in around 920 AD.

Historians have estimated that the Earth's population in 1 AD was about 300 million. This implies an annual increase of about 0.76% between the flood (2345 BC) and 1 AD, and an annual increase of about 0.16% between 1 AD and the present day. You cannot extrapolate the current rate of increase to times before the 20th century.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I don't go around saying everyone went to Heaven, and I don't go around saying everyone went to Hell.

I'm not the Judge.

Not going to actually answer are ya?

Why did you use a bowdlerized version if you meant "heaven" rather than "hell"?

You always bowdlerized it as "aitch" when you clearly want to judge that someone is hellbound without saying it quite as explicitly. Because of this I was surprised that the *victims* of the engineering and management failures in the Challenger launch were singled out for such a severe Judgement. (Though I think it is meaningless it *clearly* means something to you.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Not going to actually answer are ya?

Why did you use a bowdlerized version if you meant "heaven" rather than "hell"?

You always bowdlerized it as "aitch" when you clearly want to judge that someone is hellbound without saying it quite as explicitly. Because of this I was surprised that the *victims* of the engineering and management failures in the Challenger launch were singled out for such a severe Judgement. (Though I think it is meaningless it *clearly* means something to you.)

What???

Abraham went to aitch, Moses went to aitch, Paul went to aitch, I'm going to aitch, etc.

Do you understand what I'm saying?

 

[Hans Blaster]

What???

Abraham went to aitch, Moses went to aitch, Paul went to aitch, I'm going to aitch, etc.

Do you understand what I'm saying?

You're doomed.