- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Study: All Humanity Comes From One Couple.................... You don't say
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:41 am to Jjdoc
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:41 am to Jjdoc
He's mentioning other studies that this one supposedly upholds. Like this study showing that the Y Chromosomal Adam is actually closer to 300k years ago.
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 11/28/18 at 12:42 am
0
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:43 am to blackrose890
quote:
But plants need a planet to be on and that planet didn't finish forming for millions of years after the sun ignited. I don't know what is so difficult for you to understand.
Let it be known that blackrose890 conceded the point that plant life does not need a sun to grow. He wishes to move past that point and not really address facts.
quote:
Earth was not able to support plant life as the sun formed before the earth did.
I just proved that no sun was needed. You keep avoiding it.
So we move to his next point. There was not earth without a sun....
quote:
According to Science, the first plants don't appear until after the formation of earth which was after the ignition of the sun.
Ok... I see no contradiction to the Genesis account.
quote:
According to Genesis the plants and placed on Earth made before the Sun was made.
You stated a key word in the first... Ignition of the sun.
Whether I agree with the theory or not, consider "Let there be light" the ignition. Consider the final formation of the sun and the placement with the universe day 4.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:47 am to rickyh
quote:
Really, hunters and gatherers are doubling their population as we speak.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:49 am to Jjdoc
quote:
This study states 100k to 200k years. Se where that estimate of 135k years can fit into that?
You're still nowhere close to understanding the concept.
First, the odds that they lived at the same time are incredibly low. Impossibly low.
Second, if they did live at the same time, the odds that they lived near one another are incredibly low. Impossibly low. (Eve is thought to have lived in East Africa, and Adam Northwest Africa)
Third, if the impossibly impossible did actually occur and these two individuals had babies, THEY WERE STILL JUST TWO OUT OF A BARE MINIMUM TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HUMANS ALIVE AT THE TIME. And guess what... Those tens of thousands of humans alive 150k years ago ALSO had their own Adam and Eve that lived many years before them.
Absolutely nothing about this study, or any similar genetic studies, serves as evidence validating the stories in the Bible.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:51 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Let it be known that blackrose890 conceded the point that plant life does not need a sun to grow. He wishes to move past that point and not really address facts.
I did not concede any such point, without the sun the formation of plants would have been impossible and the planet would have been entirely lifeless.
quote:
I just proved that no sun was needed. You keep avoiding it.
So we move to his next point. There was not earth without a sun..
The sun was needed in order to complete the formation of the planet. It was needed to make the planet possible to be seeded. The sun is entirely necessary.
quote:
Ok... I see no contradiction to the Genesis account.
In the Genesis account the Earth is Completed before the sun, which is in total opposition to science which has the sun forming first. If we consider let there be light the ignition of the sun, then the sun is formed before and after the earth and last I checked we do not live in a binary solar system.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:51 am to Korkstand
quote:
Absolutely nothing about this study, or any similar genetic studies, serves as evidence validating the stories in the Bible.
Whatever you say....
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:54 am to Korkstand
quote:
Absolutely nothing about this study, or any similar genetic studies, serves as evidence validating the stories in the Bible.
This guy has to be a Poe. He's literally using the Hovind manual of deflect and redirect.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:55 am to blackrose890
quote:
This guy has to be a Poe. He's literally using the Hovind manual of deflect and redirect.
First rodeo with Jdoc?
Posted on 11/28/18 at 12:58 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
First rodeo with Jdoc?
Yeah, can you give me the rundown on him?
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:02 am to blackrose890
quote:
Yeah, can you give me the rundown on him?
I'm not going to sit here and tear him apart but he's not worth your time. He's not actually interested in debating and will never concede a point no matter how obvious. He once spent 20 pages arguing that hundreds or thousands (can't remember which) die from weed every year. I'll leave it at that.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:05 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Whatever you say....
Ok, then I say the world will have a brighter future if your lineage dies out soon.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:26 am to blackrose890
quote:
The sun was needed in order to complete the formation of the planet. It was needed to make the planet possible to be seeded. The sun is entirely necessary.
And Genesis does not contradict that. In fact, here is what Genesis states about the earth PRIOR to let there be light:
Verse 2: And the earth was without form....
Here you have the writer of Genesis stating that the earth material was there, but without form.
Then God said "Let there be light".... Sun ignition.
Then the earth began to take form.
That is the order of Genesis.... per some theories.
quote:
In the Genesis account the Earth is Completed before the sun,
The account paints a picture of a Earth in formation along with the universe.
For example, the verse that states the waters all gathered to one place. Kinda gives a picture of an earth prior to the separation of the continents.
Verse 9: "Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear"
My Point is simple.. Are you certain that is what is states. Is that what Genesis says? It's important to know what it is NOT saying as well AS saying.
quote:
If we consider let there be light the ignition of the sun, then the sun is formed before and after the earth
No. Have you studied how our sun was formed? How long did it take....etc?
Is the sun still changing?
etc...
This post was edited on 11/28/18 at 1:28 am
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:31 am to crazy4lsu
Tell that to the Mexicans and the people who live in Africa. Are their populations stagnant? The Sudan was having severe droughts years ago and every picture they showed had women with a baby in their arms, children at their feet and a growing fetus in the womb. Hard times and harsh conditions didn't stop population growth. It is the advanced societies that have stopped reproducing. Try as they might,human population will still over take the Earths ability to feed them all. But that is far away,or not. That being said, where are the graphs? Post them. 
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:40 am to Jjdoc
Howdy cousins!
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:41 am to rickyh
quote:
Tell that to the Mexicans
Wait. Are you claiming that Mexico is a hunter/gatherer society?
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:44 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
He's not actually interested in debating and will never concede a point no matter how obvious.
I have conceded many points here.
Like it or not, the points I have made here have yet to be refuted.
1- You don't need Sunlight to grow plants. Just ask those people growing pot plants. LOL! It's fact.
2- Genesis is NOT at odds with science.
“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.“ - Albert Einstein, 1941
“Anyone who chooses to believe in a Universal Creator is standing on ground as solid as a scientist who denies Creative Purpose as First Cause. Because of the laws these same scientists have discovered, there is absolutely no way to tell what made it happen. Whatever you choose is an act of pure faith.” - Stephen Hawking
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:49 am to Jjdoc
quote:
And Genesis does not contradict that. In fact, here is what Genesis states about the earth PRIOR to let there be light:
Verse 2: And the earth was without form....
Here you have the writer of Genesis stating that the earth material was there, but without form.
Then God said "Let there be light".... Sun ignition.
Then the earth began to take form.
That is the order of Genesis.... per some theories.
I'm done with you after this since you will just continuously move the goal post or place valueless confounders in response to answers.
The ignition of the sun marks the beginning of the current stage of the sun. When it was a protostar it's light wouldn't have been visible beyond its outer shell of gas. So in the sense of the sun giving light, it was not possible for the sun to not be matured and give light. So once again you are stating 2 different times of the same sun forming in the same story.
Because Genesis may say Let there be light, but later it also says
quote:
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
So chronologically you are either confused or being intentionally ignorant.
quote:
No. Have you studied how our sun was formed? How long did it take....etc?
Is the sun still changing?
etc...
I have actually, my university had an excellent program for astronomy and physics and I attended those classes with great pleasure. That's part of why this obvious attempt of yours to be whatever you're attempting to be is entirely frustrating. You almost seem to imply the sun was made as a work lamp then placed at the center of the solar system later.
I am certain that a literal reading of Genesis is a completely incorrect sequence of events for creation. I once again will reference Muslim apologetics for the later development of theories to make Genesis retroactively fit modern science. Let the book be what it is and don't try to shape it into something it was never meant to be.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 1:51 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
Wait. Are you claiming that Mexico is a hunter/gatherer society?
He thinks anyone living in a 3rd world country is a hunter gather.
Posted on 11/28/18 at 2:08 am to Jjdoc
quote:
“Anyone who chooses to believe in a Universal Creator is standing on ground as solid as a scientist who denies Creative Purpose as First Cause. Because of the laws these same scientists have discovered, there is absolutely no way to tell what made it happen. Whatever you choose is an act of pure faith.” - Stephen Hawking
I really want the origin of that quote and how it reconciles with the rest of his quotes.
Like:
quote:
In Hawking’s writings about the universe’s origin, he and co-author Leonard Mlodinow posited in the 2010 book, “The Grand Design,” that the big bang was inevitable. “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” the book states. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”
quote:
In discussing the book, he told ABC News: “One can’t prove that God doesn’t exist. But science makes God unnecessary. … The laws of physics can explain the universe without the need for a creator.”
quote:
He said during an interview with El Mundo in 2014: “Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation. What I meant by ‘we would know the mind of God’ is, we would know everything that God would know, if there were a God, which there isn’t. I’m an atheist.”
Posted on 11/28/18 at 2:45 am to blackrose890
quote:
I'm done with you after this since you will just continuously move the goal post or place valueless confounders in response to answers.
That's not the reason you are done. We both know why.
quote:
The ignition of the sun marks the beginning of the current stage of the sun. When it was a protostar it's light wouldn't have been visible beyond its outer shell of gas.
No sir. All stars have a lifespan characterized by a formation, main sequence, and eventual death.
You keep interjecting your thoughts as my theories. Stop. Who mentioned the protostar phase? I assume you are going by the nebular theory. Our Solar System began as a giant cloud of molecular gas and dust. Something happened that caused the cloud to collapse. Right?
Why didn't you mention T Tauri? Would that be because you know that it's more luminous and not yet in the current phase? You know that. You completely went from Protostar into ignition and skipped it. Why?
quote:
So in the sense of the sun giving light, it was not possible for the sun to not be matured and give light.
T Tauri….. Just saying.
quote:
So once again you are stating 2 different times of the same sun forming in the same story.
No.. I'm going through the stages of a sun in as it relates to Genesis and science.
quote:
Because Genesis may say Let there be light, but later it also says
T Tarui
quote:
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Main Sequence.
What's interesting are the verses in-between.
quote:
I have actually, my university had an excellent program for astronomy and physics and I attended those classes with great pleasure. That's part of why this obvious attempt of yours to be whatever you're attempting to be is entirely frustrating. You almost seem to imply the sun was made as a work lamp then placed at the center of the solar system later.
Then why did you skip T Tauri?
I don't imply anything of the sort.
quote:
I am certain that a literal reading of Genesis is a completely incorrect sequence of events for creation.
No.. it's not. Their is nothing suggesting that the Earth was formed with plants before the main sequence. There is no science that that disproves the earth was not in it's formation even during the T Tauri phase.
We have not gotten anywhere near the opposite view from the writers perspective. What I mean by that is the when the Sun became clear from the earth.
quote:
Let the book be what it is and don't try to shape it into something it was never meant to be.
Nah.. I like science explaining and painting a clear picture of Genesis.
Amazing how a book from 4K+ years ago got it right.
Page 16 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News