The population argument for a young Earth

[Valkhorn]

Which means you had how many to build the Great Pyramid 4,500 years ago? Quite a job for 8.

This is where the more progressive creationists involve space aliens.

 

[Valkhorn]

Actually start with eight, 4500 years ago

Allright, let's start with eight. From 8 to say 200,000,000 is a change in population of 2,500,000,000%. That's right, 2.5 billion percent.

We've observed an exponential change from 1 billion in 1800 to 6 billion in 2000, which is a change of 600% in 200 years.

Divide that 200 years into 6000 and you get 30 times, or rather 30 times 600% is 180,000%

Is that anywhere near 2.5 billion percent???

And even what's more amazing is to speculate that there were only 8 people in 4500BC, when we have ample evidence that there were millions of people alive in the ancient world.

To prove you wrong we'd have to find at least 8 skeletons dating before 4500BC, right?

Here goes:

http://www.100megsfree4.com/farshores/amummy.htm

(The Article seems to be legit). There are a few hundred mummies that are older than 4500BC right there.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Actually start with eight, 4500 years ago

You do realize the Noah's Ark scenario has been discredited eight ways from Sunday, yes?

 

[wagsbags]

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may04.html
Repopulation after the flood. Talks about how many people would be around when the pyramids were built.

A4C are you for real or are you a 13 just trying to get a rise out of us? If not, where are all the bunnies?!?!

 

[wagsbags]

From Page one...

This is one of those arguments taht show YECers use what is known as the "shotgun" method. Use every available argument, most of them are wrong but hope that at least one is right. I doubt even most YECers will claim this is a good argument.

And once again I have vastly underestimated what YECers are willing to claim.

 

[mark kennedy]

Not exactly. With a very small growth rate back then it would take a lot longer than 4 thousand years to jump from two people to 200 million.

How do you figure? 2 gets you four, four gets you eight...etc. The populations grow exponentially, not in the linear fashion the OP presumption suggests.

 

[A4C]

To prove you wrong we'd have to find at least 8 skeletons dating before 4500BC, right?

Could somebody who this person would listen to please tell him the concept of Noah and his family surviving a global flood Thanks

 

[Pete Harcoff]

How do you figure? 2 gets you four, four gets you eight...etc. The populations grow exponentially, not in the linear fashion the OP presumption suggests.

Reading stuff that isn't there into my posts again, mark?

My point in the OP (for those who missed it) is that there is an upper limit on population growth imposed by limitations on available resources in the environment. Y'know, junior science level stuff. So the idea that if humans were around for millions of years, we should cover square inch of this planet is ridiculous and refuted with primary/junior high school level science.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Could somebody who this person would listen to please tell him the concept of Noah and his family surviving a global flood Thanks

The concept is bogus. All the evidence in the world (history, geology, biogeography) points against the Noah's Ark scenario. It's mythology.

 

[MidnightBlue]

What's really depressing about this, however, is the fact that I learned this stuff before getting to high school. This is junior high level stuff at best. Heck, we learned about ecology, population cycles, etc, in primary school. It's so utterly depressing to think that there are creationist arguments being used that could be refuted by someone with a 5th grade eduction.

I know. Just makes you feel tired, doesn't it? Why do you think the Creationists' main goal is to prevent decent science education? The kiddies might find out the truth.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I know. Just makes you feel tired, doesn't it? Why do you think the Creationists' main goal is to prevent decent science education? The kiddies might find out the truth.

Francis Bacon said knowledge is power, but that's only half the story. Those who control knowledge have the real power.

 

[Valkhorn]

Could somebody who this person would listen to please tell him the concept of Noah and his family surviving a global flood Thanks

Its not who I listen to, buddy. It's what evidence is there.

There is no evidence.

Get over it.

 

[corvus_corax]

Could somebody who this person would listen to please tell him the concept of Noah and his family surviving a global flood Thanks

Could somebody who this person would listen to please tell him the concepts of geology, meteorology, paleontology, and erosion?
Thanks

 

[Hydra009]

Francis Bacon said knowledge is power, but that's only half the story. Those who control knowledge have the real power.

Quite true. I never thought about it that way, that the creationism anti-knowledge movement would be tied to political control. This ties in nicely with creationist theocratic leanings.

 

[MartinM]

And even what's more amazing is to speculate that there were only 8 people in 4500BC, when we have ample evidence that there were millions of people alive in the ancient world.

To prove you wrong we'd have to find at least 8 skeletons dating before 4500BC, right?

To be fair to A4C - this is wrong, actually. He believes that a large population was reduced to 8 survivors around 4500BC, so the existance of skeletons from before that date doesn't do anything to disprove it.

There are plenty of falsifications of the global flood; this just isn't one of them.

 

[MartinM]

Quite true. I never thought about it that way, that the creationism anti-knowledge movement would be tied to political control. This ties in nicely with creationist theocratic leanings.

It's often said of ID that it is religion, not science. I wouldn't say that it's either. It's primarily politics, motivated by religion.

 

[Mistermystery]

But I hope you do agree that ID needs religion in order to make it all work? I mean, what kind of other designer would there be besides a God? aliens? space amoeba?

 

[Smidlee]

Before civilization, mankind was restricted to relatively small Hunter-gather groups. Study of such remaining groups in modern times has shown that they tend to remain at a fairly constant population level and do not increase in size exponentially, like we have seen in civilized populations.

Of course in order to believe man been here for over 150,000 years you have to believe that man-kind just stayed in their little box of small hunter-gather groups as you call them. While there maybe a few small groups of people content in swinging in the trees and live among the animals yet for the most part man as with his history will busted out of this box as well as any borders and will continue to drain any resourse dry. Look how much resourses we spend on useless space programs like senting probes to Mars and some wanting to colonize it. this attitude is found thoughout human history. While it's only been recently mankind went to the moon yet it seem obvious that all thoughtout human history they (mankind as a whole) have strong desires to reach for the stars (heavens).

When it come down to it all dating systems especially those outside human history are based on assumptions.

 

[notto]

Of course in order to believe man been here for over 150,000 years you have to believe that man-kind just stayed in their little box of small hunter-gather groups as you call them. While there maybe a few small groups of people content in swinging in the trees and live among the animals yet for the most part man as with his history will busted out of this box as well as any borders and will continue to drain any resourse dry. Look how much resourses we spend on useless space programs like senting probes to Mars and some wanting to colonize it. this attitude is found thoughout human history. While it's only been recently mankind went to the moon yet it seem obvious that all thoughtout human history they (mankind as a whole) have strong desires to reach for the stars (heavens).

Which of course is evidenced by all of the Australian aborigines and amazon bushmen who are striving to smelt aluminum to build a spacecraft.

Nothing like projecting western norms on the entire world to try to peice together an argument.

You do realize that the a large part of the population on earth is still nothing more than hunter/gatherers or based on small subsistance agriculture, right?

 

[Jet Black]

Allright, let's start with eight. From 8 to say 200,000,000 is a change in population of 2,500,000,000%. That's right, 2.5 billion percent.

We've observed an exponential change from 1 billion in 1800 to 6 billion in 2000, which is a change of 600% in 200 years.

Divide that 200 years into 6000 and you get 30 times, or rather 30 times 600% is 180,000%

Is that anywhere near 2.5 billion percent???

does anyone have the great argument, where the pyramids were built by armies of three year olds (given that such ridiculous growth curves require a population which is extremely weighted towards the young)