Do you agree with these statements?

[AV1611VET]

Got blasted into salt for disobedience. Not really the same thing.

If God can turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, does it surprise you He can make someone look like he went through "thousands of subtle genetic variations identical to eons of independent genetic isolation with a common theme of a extreme cold weather environment."

 

[Shemjaza]

If God can turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, does it surprise you He can make someone look like he went through "thousands of subtle genetic variations identical to eons of independent genetic isolation with a common theme of a extreme cold weather environment."

It's never a mater of "can", of course he can, he's all powerful.

My point is that to extrapolate a verse about "wonderful plagues" as to be about lineages of people being transformed into something very distinctly genetically different to the other humans of their era isn't justifiable from the text.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's never a mater of "can", of course he can, he's all powerful.

My point is that to extrapolate a verse about "wonderful plagues" as to be about lineages of people being transformed into something very distinctly genetically different to the other humans of their era isn't justifiable from the text.

Even King David was punished with some bone-altering "plague wonderful" that was eating him up from the inside (Psalm 38).

 

[Shemjaza]

Even King David was punished with some bone-altering "plague wonderful" that was eating him up from the inside (Psalm 38).

Still nothing like:
"Plague that gives you and your children: stronger bones, shorter statue, elongated skull, receded chin, flatter nose, shorter throat, flat tongue, different versions of hair colour."

 

[Shemjaza]

Even King David was punished with some bone-altering "plague wonderful" that was eating him up from the inside (Psalm 38).

I think we are talking at cross purposes.

I don't dispute that the Bible says God sometimes uses plagues and deformities as a form of punishment.

I dispute that connecting this concept to the existence of Neanderthals is justified.

 

[AV1611VET]

I dispute that connecting this concept to the existence of Neanderthals is justified.

Well for the record, that's what I think these Neanderthals and Cro-Magna are: men and women who have been smitten with a plague from God.

 

[SelfSim]

If God can turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, does it surprise you He can make someone look like he went through "thousands of subtle genetic variations identical to eons of independent genetic isolation with a common theme of a extreme cold weather environment."

Neanderthals were people whose remains now give the appearance of being victims of punishment (or 'wonderful plagues')?
PS/Edit: Ok .. you just answered that .. thanks .. amazing!
PPS: Except you only think their fossilised remains give that appearance.

 

[Shemjaza]

Well for the record, that's what I think these Neanderthals and Cro-Magna are: men and women who have been smitten with a plague from God.

If so it's very unlike other plagues described.

(I initially thought that it both affected children and could be passed down would be a problem, but on reflection that is consistent with some other Biblical curses.)

 

[Philip Bruce Heywood]

Kylie wrote:
Are you suggesting that God can transform species in a way that looks like evolution because he shares bodily similarity with them?

Here, you have been on this site too long. An heroic input from yourself. If I was on it for any protracted period of time, I would go plumb crazy.

Think cloning. If you were going to re-programme the DNA of a (say, sexually reproducing vertebrate) and get the re-programmed new parents of the 'new' species on the ground so to speak, you would be well advized to work with a species as similar as possible to the species about to be revealed. Get the existing species to reproduce as though the offspring were their own. Shut off the relevant autoimmune rejection which would destroy a foreign embryo in the womb. Re-program the embryo. Induce the mother to happily give birth and rear the transformed outcome of the re-programming. Because parent and (non-genetic) offspring are so similar in reproductive organs, diet, habits and expectations -- theoretically it is possible. Just don't choose to put the embryo of a lamb in the womb of a lioness, eh? No, God did not intervene to do this, he had already seen to the necessary information technology when the species were created. That information technology did not sidestep the need for adaptation to suit environment -- the environmental needs were memorized and factored in somehow in the information systems of the transformer. So the DNA re-programming changed the DNA permanently at the moment of transformation. Try Epigenetics and Neo-Lamarckism. Tentative, but on track.

 

[AV1611VET]

If so it's very unlike other plagues described.

(I initially thought that it both affected children and could be passed down would be a problem, but on reflection that is consistent with some other Biblical curses.)

Well ... it does say ...

Deuteronomy 28:59 Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.

 

[Shemjaza]

Well ... it does say ...

Deuteronomy 28:59 Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.

...is this verse also your explanation for the diversity of modern humans?

8 individuals (5 closely related) worth of diversity becoming the variety we see today?

 

[AV1611VET]

...is this verse also your explanation for the diversity of modern humans?

No.

8 individuals (5 closely related) worth of diversity becoming the variety we see today?

We all come from Shem, Ham, or Japheth.

 

[Shemjaza]

No.We all come from Shem, Ham, or Japheth.

3 full brothers and three women isn't enough genetic diversity to account for modern genetics.

 

[AV1611VET]

3 full brothers and three women isn't enough genetic diversity to account for modern genetics.

This is true.

Have you seen My Bottleneck Challenge?

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is true.

Have you seen My Bottleneck Challenge?

Do you realize that you lose all of your "Challenges" on the first page? Genesis has two bottlenecks in them. Both of them should be obvious not just in man's genome, but in the genome of every species on the planet. That we do not see those events in the genomes tell us that they did not happen.

 

[Gottservant]

Some questions...

1. Do you agree that if you have a group of animals - say a herd of zebra - then each individual will be slightly different to the others?
2. Do you agree [...]
3. - 7. [...]

If you think it's wrong, can you tell me which one exactly do you think is incorrect?

What is mistaken is that you overlook the fact that a member of a given species, can predict selection pressure and survive dormantly while the old selection pressure wears out. So what was a disadvantage for several generations, becomes an advantage with the advent of the new selection pressure.

It's not Evolution, it's anticipating one evolution will give way to another.

So yes, as for agreeing that some members of a species are different, what is missing is the notion of which context the species are different in, in principle. Claiming survival is merely of the fittest, elides the fact that it is a question of which degree, also. Herd immunity is boosted by this idea, not challenged - as much as complaints that apes are like us, would confuse the issue.

 

[Kylie]

What is mistaken is that you overlook the fact that a member of a given species, can predict selection pressure and survive dormantly while the old selection pressure wears out. So what was a disadvantage for several generations, becomes an advantage with the advent of the new selection pressure.

It's not Evolution, it's anticipating one evolution will give way to another.

So yes, as for agreeing that some members of a species are different, what is missing is the notion of which context the species are different in, in principle. Claiming survival is merely of the fittest, elides the fact that it is a question of which degree, also. Herd immunity is boosted by this idea, not challenged - as much as complaints that apes are like us, would confuse the issue.

No. Evolution doesn't work this way. A species can't plan ahead and decide to evolve in a particular direction. You are incredibly misinformed about what evolution is.

 

[Gottservant]

what was a disadvantage for several generations, becomes an advantage with the advent of the new selection pressure

The subtext is that this happens if the new selection pressure is "properly anticipated".

Your saying it cannot be anticipated, is unscientific - how do you prove, nothing can be anticipated "before it is evolved"?

If you do, are you not suggesting that Evolution cannot be anticipated before it is "evolved": the very opposite of what it was said "Darwin did"??

 

[Kylie]

The subtext is that this happens if the new selection pressure is "properly anticipated".

Your saying it cannot be anticipated, is unscientific - how do you prove, nothing can be anticipated "before it is evolved"?

If you do, are you not suggesting that Evolution cannot be anticipated before it is "evolved": the very opposite of what it was said "Darwin did"??

What you are saying has little to do with what evolution actually is.

You also seem to be responding to yourself.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

You can add a hundred new species; but if you change the Genus then you're changing the Kind.

The genus never changes. Species have occasionally been misattributed to the wrong genus, but evolution doesn't change the genus.

Do you think there were coyotes and domestic dogs on the Ark? or just wolves?

Neither - it's just a retelling of an ancient morality tale.