Creationists: can you explain post-Flood repopulation?

[SLP]

dad vs. Aman777 vs KWCrazy...

I love watching YECs squabble among themselves. It certainly showcases the problems of the YEC position.

Especially in light of the fact that if they can find two scientists disagreeing about evolution, they immediately present it as PROOF that evolution must be wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes.

What do you think post 550 is?

 

[sfs]

What do you think post 550 is?

A failure to explain how a global Flood is consistent with observed genetic diversity. As in, it explains nothing at all about observed genetic diversity.

 

[dad]

Sorry but tree rings represent seasons, not days or weeks. Seasons.

You can say sorry till the cows come home it won't do you any good. You have no knowledge of the former nature or any observation of any tree that grew then!!

You are flailing in the dark. When trees take days and weeks to grow, obviously seasons is not what the rings represented. You just believe for no reason it is.

Do not peddle your beliefs as anything more here.

 

[dad]

Genesis 1 has plants created on Day 3, land animals created on Day 5. Adam created on Day 6.

Genesis 2 has Adam created on the same day as plants and the land animals created later.

It's the story of the creation of man, who God created from the dust of the earth and placed in the garden of Eden. Since man was created of day six, Eden had to have been created no later than day 6.
​

Eden had to be created no later than Day 4 because the animals are created afterwards.

Dear Readers, Adam was "formed" of the dust BEFORE the plants of the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4-7 Adam and Eve were both "created" in God's Image or born again Spiritually on the 6th Day. Gen 5:1-2 Eden was made the 3rd Day Gen 2:8 and then the LORD planted the first trees in Eden.

Adam was formed physically the 3rd Day and born again Spiritually or created in Christ on the 6th Day. 1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. Amen?

Baloney.

 

[dad]

Because tree rings represent tree growth during different seasons. If there were no seasons, why would there be rings?...

They did grow naturally, just not in our nature. Here it takes more time.

 

[dad]

Meanwhile, no creationist has explained how the Flood is consistent with observed genetic diversity.

Rapid evolving and adapting of the kinds from the ark.

 

[SkyWriting]

just sit quietly for a moment and think about that emboldened section. If you are a person of average intelligence, it should eventually dawn upon you that something doesn't make sense.

How could the light from stars, billions of kilometres away, be instantly available to be seen here, if those stars had only just been created? Remember, that starlight is not like an instant snapshot or photographic slide that your God could display on a screen. Light is a constant stream of waves/particles. They must have originated from somewhere. And we know that that 'somewhere' is extremely far away, from where that stream takes thousands of years to reach us.

Sorry, but your claim just doesn't add up.

It could happen if people didn't experience the time.
Which would be the case as described in scripture.

 

[SkyWriting]

Perhaps I'm missing it but I see nothing whatsoever in that verse that indicates God chose the animals that would be on the Ark, which was after all, your original assertion.

As with above,
Seek ye not and find not.

NIV
15 Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark.

KJV
15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
Perhaps I'm missing it but I see nothing whatsoever in that verse that indicates God chose the animals that would be on the Ark, which was after all, your original assertion.



Coming two by two to Noah.........two of each Kind......is not normal animal behavior.

 

[sfs]

Rapid evolving and adapting of the kinds from the ark.

Doesn't matter. Rapid evolution won't produce the distribution of genetic variation that we observe.

 

[dad]

Doesn't matter. Rapid evolution won't produce the distribution of genetic variation that we observe.

No? Why not? You do claim it all came from evolution, don't you? Just put that on fast forward, and it comes from the created kinds and evolution.

Bring it.

 

[SkyWriting]

Do you honestly think that the above addresses the issue of necessary hyperfast evolution of animals in the 4,400 years since the Flood?

I did mention looking for truth yourself.
But I guess it's wise to trust me instead.

Super-fast evolution

How quickly can new species arise? In as little as 6,000 years, according to a study of Australian sea stars.
Read more at: Superfast evolution in sea stars

 

[SkyWriting]

Doesn't matter. Rapid evolution won't produce the distribution of genetic variation that we observe.

A prophet who speaks for the past. Not much to worry about I guess.
Who is going to check your visions?

 

[dad]

How quickly can new species arise?

In the days of Noah, probably in hours or days. Maybe weeks or months. In some cases I can accept years.

ONLY with a different nature is this possible not in this present state nature. We could not for example, get thirty some odd species of tigers from one pair of tigers on Noah's ark in 4500 years in this state. Let's be honest. You need to take the plunge.

 

[lifepsyop]

Meanwhile, no creationist has explained how the Flood is consistent with observed genetic diversity.

Do you have an argument?

 

[sfs]

A prophet who speaks for the past. Not much to worry about I guess.
Who is going to check your visions?

Other scientists. With data. That's just how we roll.

 

[sfs]

No? Why not? You do claim it all came from evolution, don't you? Just put that on fast forward, and it comes from the created kinds and evolution.

Bring it.

Putting on fast forward is fine. A rapidly expanding population, though, leaves very clear genetic traces. Whatever genetic variation was in the original tiny population remains, at a frequency not too different from what it started with. For Noah and family, that would mean a minimum frequency of 10%, since there were 10 independent copies of the genome on the Ark. As the population expands, some of those variants will drift down in frequency some, so that you'll find lots of variants in around 10% of chromosomes (and around 20%, etc), some around 5%, and fewer and fewer as you look at rarer variants. There will also be a sprinkling of rare variants, from new mutations.

Real genetic variation data looks nothing at all like this. There are roughly ten times as many variants at 1% frequency as there are at 10%, and more than a hundred times as many at 0.1% frequency.

So that's the challenge: explain why there are millions of low frequency genetic variants in the human population.

ETA: Mind you, that's not the only genetic problem with the Flood, but it's probably the easiest to explain.

 

[sfs]

Do you have an argument?

Yes. Do you have a solution?

 

[Queller]

Especially in light of the fact that if they can find two scientists disagreeing about evolution, they immediately present it as PROOF that evolution must be wrong.

 

[Queller]

You can say sorry till the cows come home it won't do you any good. You have no knowledge of the former nature or any observation of any tree that grew then!!

Neither do you but you seem quite happy to assert things anyway.

You are flailing in the dark. When trees take days and weeks to grow, obviously seasons is not what the rings represented.

Correct, because there would be no rings. For example, bamboo grows in weeks and days yet has no rings.

See. No rings.

You just believe for no reason it is.

I have reasons for everything I believe.

Do not peddle your beliefs as anything more here.

But it's OK for you to peddle your unreasoned beliefs here?