Rejection of evolution correlates with racism

[trophy33]

I'll just repeat what I said: Except that there many who interpret it to mean a global flood. The phrase 'all the lands' can be taken to mean all the world.

Although this is majorly off-topic.

OK, I will just repeat my point - It cant be taken to mean all the planet, its misunderstanding and eisegesis.

I am aware there are some (not many) who interpret the text wrongly, according to their modern ideas, but thats their struggle, not ours.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

OK, I will just repeat my point - It cant be taken to mean all the planet, its misunderstanding and eisegesis.

I am aware there are some (not many) who interpret the text wrongly, according to their modern ideas, but thats their struggle, not ours.

Except that the script doesn't say "Please not: this event only happened in Mesopotamia and did not occur in the whole world."

So it can be taken to mean all the planet since the phrase 'all the lands' can mean all the lands of Mesopotamia or all the lands of the earth.

But what does any of this have to do with evolution?

 

[trophy33]

Except that the script doesn't say "Please not: this event only happened in Mesopotamia and did not occur in the whole world."

And this post does not say "this text is written in the 21st century vocabulary and the words mean this, this, this..."

Its external knowledge not present in the text ifself.

 

[trophy33]

But what does any of this have to do with evolution?

I do not force you to continue.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I do not force you to continue.

And you might want to go and make your own thread on this on the appropriate subforum.

 

[trophy33]

And you might want to go and make your own thread on this on the appropriate subforum.

And you might simply stop doing what you do not want to do.

 

[trophy33]

What!? Hogwash! Creationists believe in a common ancestor too, Adam & Eve, as well as a higher power who judges mankind. So that rubbish makes no sense.

Just Adam, in this case, because Eve was made from him ;-)

And Adam was made of dust, so our common ancestor would be... dust?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

And you might simply stop doing what you do not want to do.

Hence why I'm telling you to go to another subforum where it is more appropriate to discuss the historic value of the Flood story and subsequent translations, not on a thread where the topic is how views on evolution correlate with racism.

 

[trophy33]

Hence why I'm telling you to go to another subforum where it is more appropriate to discuss the historic value of the Flood story and subsequent translations, not on a thread where the topic is how views on evolution correlate with racism.

You responded to my post an developed a conversation and then you suddenly began teaching me to go to do that elsewhere, playing a moderator.

Oh mine... whatever.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You responded to my post an developed a conversation and then you suddenly began teaching me to go to do that elswhere.

Oh mine... whatever.

Two posts, half of which asks what any of it has to do with the thread topic, is not 'developing a conversation'.

 

[trophy33]

Two posts, half of which asks what any of it has to do with the thread topic, is not 'developing a conversation'.

Obiously, its good as long as your post is the last one. Have it your way.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Myth" is a wrong word, IMHO. More something like "based on true events" dramatization.

I am pretty sure that was some devastating flood in Mesopotamia that killed the vast majority of population and animals.

What numbers or names are factual is hard to say for me.

There is a good evidence for such a small local flood. But once again, the idea that the number of humans was lowered to eight people has been thoroughly refuted. That flood probably inspired the story that inspired the forerunners to the Epic of Gilgamesh and that appears to have inspired the Noah's Ark story during the Babylonian captivity.

 

[trophy33]

That contradicts the fall of Adam & Eve which is what brought death and sin to the planet. That also contradicts the sin of man and a need for a savior, which contradicts the need for Jesus to die for our sins. That would mean no need for a savior. And Jesus dying for our sins is the core of Christianity.

The only sin you are aware of is the sin of Adam/Eve? You would need no savior for your own sins?

 

[NBB]

"The researchers theorized that belief in evolution would tend to increase people's identification with all humanity, due to the common ancestry, and would lead to less prejudicial attitudes."

I think this study is trying too hard to find some connection.
Christians also believe in common ancestry from Adam and Eve, but more important that every human is valueable because they are Gods creation and have an spirit and soul inside, in a proper christian thought race etc doesn't matter much because of this.

 

[trophy33]

There is a good evidence for such a small local flood.

Not sure how you define "small", it was pretty catastrophic for the only area where the human civilization was located in the time.

But once again, the idea that the number of humans was lowered to eight people has been thoroughly refuted.

No idea where did you get this from, the opposite is true. In the human genome we can see that the humanity was several times reduced to just few individuals and one time even into just one woman (the number of men is uncertain).

 

[trophy33]

"The researchers theorized that belief in evolution would tend to increase people's identification with all humanity, due to the common ancestry, and would lead to less prejudicial attitudes."

I think this study is trying too hard to find some connection.
Christians also believe in common ancestry from Adam and Eve, but more important that every human is valueable because they are Gods creation and have an spirit and soul inside, in a proper christian thought race etc doesn't matter much because of this.

Its commonly the Achilles' heel of many studies, that scientists try to interpret the facts according to their biased opinions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not sure how you define "small", it was pretty catastrophic for the only area where the human civilization was located in the time.

It depends upon how one defines "civilization". The most likely candidate occurred roughly 5,000 years ago. That would not have affected China at all. So saying that it was the only area of human civilization may not be correct. Here is a link to an article on the most likely candidate:

Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth | National Center for Science Education

No idea where did you get this from, the opposite is true. In the human genome we can see that the humanity was several times reduced to just few individuals and one time even into just one woman (and maybe few men).

Citation needed. I know of no such cases. I know of times that it was less than 10,000 but more than 1,000. In fact one of my favorite arguments is the fact that we do not have to worry about waking up on the wrong side of town in a seedy motel bathtub filled with ice is evidence against Noah's Flood. A

I just realized your error. At the times of mitochondrial Eve and Y Chromosome Adam there was not just one man or just one woman. You are misunderstanding those articles. There were still thousands of humans at that time. We can just trace our matrilineal ancestry and patrilineal ancestry to one individual. That does not imply that there were very few people at that time.

 

[trophy33]

It depends upon how one defines "civilization".

Highly developed and stable society - agriculture, religion, concentration of people in one place, writings...

I just realized your error. At the times of mitochondrial Eve and Y Chromosome Adam there was not just one man or just one woman. You are misunderstanding those articles. There were still thousands of humans at that time. We can just trace our matrilineal ancestry and patrilineal ancestry to one individual. That does not imply that there were very few people at that time.

I do not claim that in the time of mitochondrial Eve there was just one woman on the planet. But the humanity got reduced, because the other women/men except of the few who survived in various times are not in our line.

And such reduction of humanity happened several times in history. Its highly probable they were in some form reflected in stories.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Highly developed and stable society - agriculture, religion, concentration of people, writings...

That event may have happened before your definition of civiliazation.

I do not claim that in the time of mitochondrial Eve there was just one woman on the planet. But the humanity got reduced, because the other women/men except of the few who survived in various times are not in our line.

And such reduction of humanity happened several times in history. Its highly probable they were in some form reflected in stories.

Then I would have to flat out say that you are wrong. Please find a valid source that supports you. I can find sources that tell of when we got down to just over a thousand. But once again, your claim is refuted by the fact that you do not have to worry about waking up in a motel room bathtub missing a kidney.

 

[trophy33]

That event may have happened before your definition of civiliazation.

Sure, why not. I do not try to date it. History and its interpretation is ever changing science. Nothing certain.

But once again, your claim is refuted by the fact that you do not have to worry about waking up in a motel room bathtub missing a kidney.

Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.