If the flood is true, we all evolved from Noah.

[MarcusHill]

Don't be stupid. God handed out a whole bunch of new Y-chromosomes whilst he was erasing all the evidence of a global flood. He was feeling particularly impish, so he handed them out in a way to make it look like the spread of humanity had taken place in a totally different (and much more protracted) fashion than it really did.

 

[moogoob]

Nice genetic evidence. What many creationists don't often realise is the sheer amount of evidence that contradicts a literal reading of Genesis. They often think that scientists woke up one morning and said "this fossil looks like an ape-man, so we must be descended from it!" or "man, this strata looks old. It's... (pulls number from a hat) two million years ago!" when nothing can be farther from the truth.

 

[lemmings]

Anyway, The DNA pull was much stronger then.

Are you refering to the hydrogen bonds between the base pairs that hold the two strands together?

 

[Loudmouth]

Sometimes I just get so offended for God, when I read the things you all write. Which really is not at all fair, as you don't believe in him, and so, are doing or saying nothing wrong.
Think it feels like, if someone dis-respects a member of your family. It's just not nice to hear at all.

The problem is that creationist claims back God into these corners. It is the creationists who are making God look stupid.

Anyway, The DNA pull was much stronger then. Hence the reason it is Devolution as opposed to Evolution.
There were only 7 roos to my knowledge, so of course they are all going to go in the same direction. They live in families, just like most animals.

There is no such thing as devolution. Evolution is change in any direction.

Secondly, if we all have a common ancestor who lived 4,000 years ago or so then it is impossible to explain much of human genetic variation. For example, just one gene (DRB1) has around 400 different genotypes, and that's just one gene. The maximum number of DRB1 genes possible on the ark is around 20 or so. Where did the other 380 alleles come from? And how did the DRB1 alleles disperse themselves so evenly across the entire human population? If Genesis is correct then we should see very specific local varieties of the DRB1 gene, but we don't.

Then there is the problem of biogeography that others have mentioned. The distribution of mammals (marsupials and plancetals) is impossible to explain in a flood scenario.

I believe if you count the generations back (I'm trusting someone elses word here) The population of the world is just about bang on, to have originated from just eight people breeding.

It's not, as the DRB1 gene demonstrates. Also, there were very large kingdoms with large populations in the same time frame as the flood. It's hard to have kingdoms with 1 million members in just a few years from only 4 breeding pairs.

Like I often say, I have little knowledge, I just know what I believe.
I believe someday it will all be revealed.

This is really confusing. You have little knowledge but know what you believe. That means you believe very little. And if it will be revealed later, then how do you know the truth now?

 

[mrswebber]

Blayz, I've not read anything that you have written ,that smacks of much intelligence. So, people in glass houses and all that.

I don't understand why people on here are not allowed to say their take on a matter. It seems to me, if something someone says is not to your liking, insulting their intelligence is your usual move, and I hate retoring back with it, but you are all so rude. If you wish to make a point, then by all means do so. Please however, leave out the rudeness, there is no need for it.


Why are you all on a Christian forum anyway? I don't get it.

 

[Tomk80]

Blayz, I've not read anything that you have written ,that smacks of much intelligence. So, people in glass houses and all that.

I don't understand why people on here are not allowed to say their take on a matter.

You are on a discussion and debate forum. You are allowed to say whatever you like on a matter, but on such a forum it seems quite strange to not expect a response.

It seems to me, if something someone says is not to your liking, insulting their intelligence is your usual move, and I hate retoring back with it, but you are all so rude. If you wish to make a point, then by all means do so. Please however, leave out the rudeness, there is no need for it.

I've read all responses. I can see why you would find Blayz' response rude, but I frankly don't find any of the other posters rude. In fact, I think their posts are quite polite. They do call attention to the fact that you do not have a lot of knowledge on biology, but without being insulting, this is just a true statement. Some have asked you how you can say to know the truth while you know so little of the things you say to know the truth about. I think that's quite a pertinant question, don't you think?

Why are you all on a Christian forum anyway? I don't get it.

Not all of those responding are christians. Frumious Bandersnatch is a christian.

For me, I'm on this forum because I think professional creationists are lying bastards, scumbags and quacks who purposefully try to deceive people like you in the name of faith. In my more cynical moments I think professional creationists are lying bastards, scumbags and quacks who purposefully try to deceive people like you in the name of the money they get from people of faith donating them money and buying their books. I think creationism is a festering, puss-filled wound in christianity that needs to be isolated, treated and removed lest it infects the whole of christianity. Given the importance of christians in American politics and the importance of America in world politics and given that biology interests me, I think removing this festering wound is one thing I can do to make the world a better place. I try to do others, but everyone needs a hobby.

Mind, I think I have stated my views on creationism above mildly.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Blayz, I've not read anything that you have written ,that smacks of much intelligence. So, people in glass houses and all that.

I don't understand why people on here are not allowed to say their take on a matter.

You are allowed to say whatever you want but this is a debate board. When you say something that is obviously wrong you can expect people to debate it.

It seems to me, if something someone says is not to your liking, insulting their intelligence is your usual move, and I hate retoring back with it, but you are all so rude.

It is not your intelligence that is the problem it is your self admitted lack of knowlede.

If you wish to make a point, then by all means do so. Please however, leave out the rudeness, there is no need for it.

It becomes difficult not to be rude when refuting an obviously wrong claim for the 50th time but I suppose we should try harder to be civil.

Why are you all on a Christian forum anyway? I don't get it.

If you think that none of the people who realize that the flood of Noah was not global are Christians you are very mistaken. Check out Answers in Creation or the Affiliation of Chrstian Geologists for example.

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't understand why people on here are not allowed to say their take on a matter.

It goes both ways. You can say whatever you want but that does not mean we have to accept it as true, and we (just like you) are allowed to say our take on the matter.

It seems to me, if something someone says is not to your liking, insulting their intelligence is your usual move, and I hate retoring back with it, but you are all so rude.

I used the DRB1 gene and biogeography as two examples of why a recent global flood as described in Genesis did not occur. I find it strange that you want to focus on insults instead of the facts.

Why are you all on a Christian forum anyway? I don't get it.

To stop the erosion of science education at the source.

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

I think it needs to be said that there is a science that investigates global distribution of species called biogeography. The distribution of species on this planet can be accounted for through a mix of fossil record, current distributions, and genetics. It doesnt trace to a single point for all higher taxa and certainly not in recent geologic time. Put simply, the flood is unnecessary and in fact inadequate to explain distribution.

 

[mrswebber]

Tomk80 It is true, sciences were never my subject, that's why I ended up being an accountant.
However, the sciences were my late Grandfathers, who indeed lectured at Heriot Watt university most of his adult life, on the sciences, and Math.
My grandfather was a "Creationist" and I can assure you, he was not a lying bastard, scumbag, or quack.
In 87 years of life, he never took a penny off of any one for proclaiming the Gospel. Anything that he ever said, to his knowledge, it was the whole truth.
A more devout, loving, sincere person you would be hard pushed to find. So please do not place all Creationists in the little box you have created for them.

 

[Tomk80]

Tomk80 It is true, sciences were never my subject, that's why I ended up being an accountant.
However, the sciences were my late Grandfathers, who indeed lectured at Heriot Watt university most of his adult life, on the sciences, and Math.
My grandfather was a "Creationist" and I can assure you, he was not a lying bastard, scumbag, or quack.

I said professional creationists. People from organisations like answers in genesis, the discovery institute or the institute for creation research.
[qutoe]In 87 years of life, he never took a penny off of any one for proclaiming the Gospel. Anything that he ever said, to his knowledge, it was the whole truth.
A more devout, loving, sincere person you would be hard pushed to find. So please do not place all Creationists in the little box you have created for them.[/quote]
I do not. I place them in two boxes. The professionals, members of the abovementioned organisations, and the duped. I would put your grandfather amongst the duped. "The sciences" is a big area. Being knowledgable in one of them does not make you knowledgable in all of them.

 

[Loudmouth]

Tomk80 It is true, sciences were never my subject, that's why I ended up being an accountant.
However, the sciences were my late Grandfathers, who indeed lectured at Heriot Watt university most of his adult life, on the sciences, and Math.
My grandfather was a "Creationist" and I can assure you, he was not a lying bastard, scumbag, or quack.
In 87 years of life, he never took a penny off of any one for proclaiming the Gospel. Anything that he ever said, to his knowledge, it was the whole truth.
A more devout, loving, sincere person you would be hard pushed to find. So please do not place all Creationists in the little box you have created for them.

It would have been very interesting having your late grandfather on this forum. If he was a gracious and sincere scientist I am sure he would have ended up agreeing with us, that it is a physical impossibility for the current population to have been derived from 8 people some 4,000 years ago. The evidence is simply too overwhelming. He could have, despite the evidence, still held on to his beliefs but the scientist in him would have to agree that there is mountains of evidence against his case.

As to the professional creationists that Tom is referring to, they have sworn an oath to ignore evidence that contradicts their claims. This is not how science is done, nor any honest endeavour.

Perhaps this would be easier if you could list for us the evidence that led you to the conclusion that you hold. If you believe as you do because of the Bible and Bible alone without any evidence then just say so. If you want to learn more about the evidence then I am sure that many of us will politely run through it for you.

 

[MoonLancer]

List of reasons why Noah and his family could not have possibly repopulated the entire planet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders

thats only because mating is not based on good gens anymore (except for good looks), and because bad genes are kept alive through medical science.

i misunderstood your post lemmings. My answer does explain why we have so much messed up dna, but i'm not saying that it explains new earth creationists.

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

Tomk80 It is true, sciences were never my subject, that's why I ended up being an accountant.
However, the sciences were my late Grandfathers, who indeed lectured at Heriot Watt university most of his adult life, on the sciences, and Math.
My grandfather was a "Creationist" and I can assure you, he was not a lying bastard, scumbag, or quack.
In 87 years of life, he never took a penny off of any one for proclaiming the Gospel. Anything that he ever said, to his knowledge, it was the whole truth.
A more devout, loving, sincere person you would be hard pushed to find. So please do not place all Creationists in the little box you have created for them.

In the words of Richard Dawkins:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is absolutely safe to say that, if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane[/FONT]

Such sentiments derive from the fact that the evidence for evolution is so vast and the concept is so central to the modern understanding of biology that it is inconcievable how any but a stubborn review or willful ignorance of the subject can result in disbelief. And this is in fact an observation of most people involved in this debate from the evolution side. Those opposed to evolution, without exception, display ignorance of science or evolutionary theory in some fundimental way.

 

[FishFace]

Tomk80 It is true, sciences were never my subject, that's why I ended up being an accountant.
However, the sciences were my late Grandfathers, who indeed lectured at Heriot Watt university most of his adult life, on the sciences, and Math.
My grandfather was a "Creationist" and I can assure you, he was not a lying bastard, scumbag, or quack.
In 87 years of life, he never took a penny off of any one for proclaiming the Gospel. Anything that he ever said, to his knowledge, it was the whole truth.
A more devout, loving, sincere person you would be hard pushed to find. So please do not place all Creationists in the little box you have created for them.

It's the "professional" creationists like Kent Hovind and Michael Behe that, I believe, Tom was referring to. Hoving was clearly a fraud and a cheat, and is now in prison for it. Behe is a fraud as well, but unfortunately trying to publish unsound science isn't illegal, unlike tax dodging.

We're not insulting all creationists. But it we might often come very close to insulting those who repeat the lies they've been told are wrong hundreds of times, and have been given the evidence to prove it. We try not to insult, but get very frustrated with, those who cannot think of anything intelligent to say and pretend that "God did it" is sufficient.

 

[FishFace]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is absolutely safe to say that, if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane

[/FONT]Agreed. Dawkins may come across as rude and arrogant, but he strikes a chord with me because his rudeness is only felt so due to the years of playing to religion. His statement above probably sounds awful to some people but, nonetheless, it is true. It is downright impossible that someone could be of sound mind, of competent reasoning capability and in possession of all the facts, and still claim evolution is wrong.

 

[mpok1519]

It was a regional flood so this thread is obsolete.

 

[Skaloop]

It was a regional flood so this thread is obsolete.

But that's not what the Bible says.

 

[mpok1519]

well, to the people that wrote the Bible, their small corner of the world WAS the world. since we didn't have great methods of transportation back then, the entire world was jammed into a small microcosm.

their understanding of the world was simply the area they knew. they didn't know the world was much, much larger.

the bible doesn't lie, its just very nonspecific and mysterious

 

[Skaloop]

the bible doesn't lie, its just very nonspecific and mysterious

Or, it's just wrong.