re: Study: All Humanity Comes From One Couple.................... You don't say

I want insult you or anyone. We have a free will and can choose what we believe. I believe, this time. That the pure science and mathematics bare the Truth. Rational is objective, but the Truth is constant.

quote:

---

From Fast moving water to Conglomerate to Redwall and other beds to Decay rate of fish fossils to Massive plant and animal graveyards to Widely diverse fossil mixtures....

There is a ton of evidence for a flood.

We find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers that cover all the continents. For example, most of the rock layers in the walls of Grand Canyon (more than a mile above sea level) contain marine fossils. Fossilized shellfish are even found in the Himalayas.

Ton of evidence

---

You think this is because of a flood?

quote:

---

You're making the assumption that waters have never risen except for the flood.

---

I make no such assumption. You stated there is no evidence. I just gave you evidence to which you singled out 2 things to "isolate" rather than taking the whole.

There is a worldwide tradition among natives of a global flood. This is something we find everywhere.

What Rob is suggesting is that analysis of population growth statistics confirms that there was zero population at the estimated time of the end of the flood.

Human palaeontological evidence exists even in the earliest geologic 'ages'. If the layers of rock were laid down by a global flood and then interpreted as evolutionary long-ages, human remains and artefacts would appear to be in such positions. The most ancient human artefacts date to the post-flood era. This indicates that the earlier hardware could have been buried beyond reach by a huge flood.


There is a lot of evidence.

I used to try and educate YEC and proponents of a literal interpretation of Genesis for pages and pages.

Ultimately you come to realize these type of people are not looking to learn or be educated. They have decided that there is a singular, unwavering truth found in Genesis and they must seek out any small scrap of data that can be contorted right that view. Debating such people is an exercise in futility and only serves to frustrate you.

And this isn’t an attack on religion or Christianity. Hundreds of millions of Christians all over the world, and in fact the largest single Christian subgroup, openly embrace the scientific understanding of evolution, descent and the age of the Earth.

quote:

---

Yea, it's almost as if having a crazy high pregnancy/infant mortality rate and having a life expectancy of 30 years or so affect population growth.

---

We can go at this in many ways, but I suggest we take all of the evidence to paint a picture.

You are saying that people had a life expectancy of 30 years. I suggest that is not known but we will go with it.

- Women can conceive as soon as they start having a menstrual cycle. let's go with 13.

- You state 30 years was the life span. That's the possibility of 17 kids. if we hold to the STRICT death at 30 and give birth at 13.

quote:

---

just gave you evidence to which you singled out 2 things to "isolate" rather than taking the whole.

---

The whole is irrelevant when its components are false, I will not be bogged down by having to address everything you say. That old apologetics technique of constantly setting up new barriers and splitting to counterpoints is not something that I'm obligated to take part in.

quote:

---

There is a worldwide tradition among natives of a global flood. This is something we find everywhere.

---

This has been addressed, the flood narratives largely do not remotely resemble one another and the Biblical account is not even the oldest. Japan doesn't even have a flood myth.

quote:

---

What Rob is suggesting is that analysis of population growth statistics confirms that there was zero population at the estimated time of the end of the flood.

---

What's he's suggesting is stupid, it's a manipulation of math to show false data based on a predetermined narrative. There's a mathematical proof that 1 = 2 with the same sort of deception.

quote:

---

Human palaeontological evidence exists even in the earliest geologic 'ages'. If the layers of rock were laid down by a global flood and then interpreted as evolutionary long-ages, human remains and artefacts would appear to be in such positions. The most ancient human artefacts date to the post-flood era. This indicates that the earlier hardware could have been buried beyond reach by a huge flood.

---

Oh, the old hydrologic column argument. The argument that the creatures of earth wound up buried in order of evolutionary history somehow in a global flood. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that areas that were consistently alternating between sea and dry land according to history has alternating layers of sea life and land creatures. As to the human artifact evidence I would invite you to actually check a site that isn't AnswersinGenesis to show you that the artifact record is rather unbroken.

quote:

---

There is a lot of evidence.

---

There is a lot of apologetics and fabrication.

quote:

---

And? How does that remove it from a global flood?

---

Because the actual evidence shows a 5 to 10 meter, glacier fed rise in sea level over the course of years. Not a flood that covered even the highest mountain on Earth by 15 cubits as per Genesis.

quote:

---

A Flood is a flood. What text and how are you reading that text?

---

I'm reading the false account in Genesis regarding a flood that covered the whole of earth overtopping the highest peaks of the world by 15 cubits in which all of the world, for the exception of Noah's crew, died a horrible death.

I look forward to your next spin, deflect cycle, and dodge.

quote:

---

- You state 30 years was the life span. That's the possibility of 17 kids. if we hold to the STRICT death at 30 and give birth at 13.

---

That makes the assumption that no women on-demand breast fed their child which is a 99% effective form of birth control over 6 months and 80% effective over a year. Makes the assumption that no pregnancy resulted in miscarriage. Makes the assumption that no abortion was performed. Makes the assumption that the mother would survive all 17 births.

It also makes the assumption that modern menarche age applies to a time where nutrition would have been a huge barrier and also implies that nutrition was good enough for a woman to be capable of conception each time.

quote:

---

Don't have to it's laughable

---

You are a snarky little frick.

You really kick arse at internet forums and social media.

Thus basically confirming that you really suck arse at real life.

Keep hiding on the internet, it is scary for pseudo-intellectuals like yourself out in the real world.

Mommy lied to you, there appears to be absolutely nothing special about you at all. You don't even realize that when all non-conformists are actually doing the same thing --- you become the conformists.

Success will change you...This is how we know you have accomplished nothing of substance in your life.

Every post just proves it. All while making you feel clever and special.

You know who is really laughing? Your bank teller when she pulls up your account.

quote:

---

- You state 30 years was the life span. That's the possibility of 17 kids. if we hold to the STRICT death at 30 and give birth at 13.

---

That logic also states that women have the possibility of having ~27 kids today.

How many are they actually having? Even your sub-Saharan African countries aren't even averaging 1/3rd of that. Taking a third of your 17 child figure leaves us with less than 6 kids per woman, and that's assuming the woman actually lives through all the child births and starts having children right off the bat.