Total Posts:52|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

YEC flood myth and genetic consequences..

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
jh1234l
Posts: 580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2014 5:25:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

The flying spaghetti monster tweaked with the evidence to fool the scientists into believing lies.
My political compass:
Economic Left/Right: -1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.82
1 square right of Nelson Mandela, 2 squares down from Francois Hollande
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 7:12:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

And how would you "see a genetic bottleneck"? (Forget where you might guess me to be at on this subject, the question is a technical one)
This space for rent.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 7:46:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 7:12:31 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck roughly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

And how would you "see a genetic bottleneck"? (Forget where you might guess me to be at on this subject, the question is a technical one)

Cheetahs, for example, had all but one species wiped out 10,000 years ago. With low numbers, close relatives were forced to interbreed. They are closely related, and there is no rejection of skin grafts from one cheetah to another because of this low genetic variance. They went through a genetic bottleneck. Why do we not see this low genetic variance in humans, or dogs, or...etc?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 7:56:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 7:46:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:12:31 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck roughly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

And how would you "see a genetic bottleneck"? (Forget where you might guess me to be at on this subject, the question is a technical one)

Cheetahs, for example, had all but one species wiped out 10,000 years ago. With low numbers, close relatives were forced to interbreed. They are closely related, and there is no rejection of skin grafts from one cheetah to another because of this low genetic variance. They went through a genetic bottleneck. Why do we not see this low genetic variance in humans, or dogs, or...etc?

So if there was a flood, we all could get skin grafts from each other?
This space for rent.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 8:31:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 7:56:57 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:46:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:12:31 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck roughly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

And how would you "see a genetic bottleneck"? (Forget where you might guess me to be at on this subject, the question is a technical one)

Cheetahs, for example, had all but one species wiped out 10,000 years ago. With low numbers, close relatives were forced to interbreed. They are closely related, and there is no rejection of skin grafts from one cheetah to another because of this low genetic variance. They went through a genetic bottleneck. Why do we not see this low genetic variance in humans, or dogs, or...etc?

So if there was a flood, we all could get skin grafts from each other?

If there was a gene limiting catastrophe 4500 years ago this would be a possibility. Do you have an explanation for the genetic variety we see in most organisms today?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 8:44:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 8:31:13 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:56:57 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:46:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:12:31 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck roughly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

And how would you "see a genetic bottleneck"? (Forget where you might guess me to be at on this subject, the question is a technical one)

Cheetahs, for example, had all but one species wiped out 10,000 years ago. With low numbers, close relatives were forced to interbreed. They are closely related, and there is no rejection of skin grafts from one cheetah to another because of this low genetic variance. They went through a genetic bottleneck. Why do we not see this low genetic variance in humans, or dogs, or...etc?

So if there was a flood, we all could get skin grafts from each other?

If there was a gene limiting catastrophe 4500 years ago this would be a possibility. Do you have an explanation for the genetic variety we see in most organisms today?

I do get your basic idea - doing a sort of standard deviation on the human genomes, and correlate that with assumed rates of variation. But it's out of my league to have anything specific to offer here.

A pure ID'er (i.e. not a biblical creationist) would be asking if variety points to a single creative event or multiple injections of information. Well, actually, I think a Biblical creationist can still ask that same question - has God done any creating since the garden?
This space for rent.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 9:06:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 8:44:42 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 8:31:13 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:56:57 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:46:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 7:12:31 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck roughly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

And how would you "see a genetic bottleneck"? (Forget where you might guess me to be at on this subject, the question is a technical one)

Cheetahs, for example, had all but one species wiped out 10,000 years ago. With low numbers, close relatives were forced to interbreed. They are closely related, and there is no rejection of skin grafts from one cheetah to another because of this low genetic variance. They went through a genetic bottleneck. Why do we not see this low genetic variance in humans, or dogs, or...etc?

So if there was a flood, we all could get skin grafts from each other?

If there was a gene limiting catastrophe 4500 years ago this would be a possibility. Do you have an explanation for the genetic variety we see in most organisms today?

I do get your basic idea - doing a sort of standard deviation on the human genomes, and correlate that with assumed rates of variation. But it's out of my league to have anything specific to offer here.

A pure ID'er (i.e. not a biblical creationist) would be asking if variety points to a single creative event or multiple injections of information. Well, actually, I think a Biblical creationist can still ask that same question - has God done any creating since the garden?

That is a good question, but it would need to be qualified: Has God done any creating since the flood? Is there any evidence, and what would be considered evidence of this? I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it". Also, continuity across the posited flood era in haplogroups in most areas of the world would be difficult to explain, I imagine.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 9:36:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

lol at you're last paragraph. Yeah, my inner thought to "I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it" ". was "No, that's exactly what you're hoping for, otherwise you wouldn't have thrown the slogan into the conversation"

But I also don't think the flood has to be global. In fact, there's clues in the text itself:
- "the Nephilim were in the land in those days, and also afterwards"
- the reference to 20 foot depth - obviously the ancients knew as well as us that 20' (in cubits, I'm sure) is a very small dimension relative to mountains.
- God sent a wind to dry the land - how would that help if flooding was universal?
This space for rent.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 10:28:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

You are overlooking the "YEC" in the forum title. I am specifically referring to the flood in young Earth Creationists interpretations, which is a global account.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 10:49:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

Well, sure, this question wasnt aimed towards people who beleive that the flood was local, it was aimed towards people who beleive that the flood was global.

In terms of the flood in genesis, i would be inclined to agree with you, in that the flood, if it did happen, was local. But there are people who claim that the flood was global and literal.

And yes, im sure that a young earth creationist wouldnt beleive you either.
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 11:05:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

Not just for Humans either, but for essentially every species. I will throw a stick in the YEC's direction and answer, "They only see a loss of genetic information from generation to generation, so Noah & Co must have had all the genetic information required of the current human race". Something like that.
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 12:12:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 11:05:42 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

Not just for Humans either, but for essentially every species. I will throw a stick in the YEC's direction and answer, "They only see a loss of genetic information from generation to generation, so Noah & Co must have had all the genetic information required of the current human race". Something like that.

Okay, keep in mind I am a lay person here, would this be something like a "super genome"? Would this be an explanation for the so called "junk DNA"? ... Or is there another explanation?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 1:11:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 12:12:07 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 11:05:42 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

Not just for Humans either, but for essentially every species. I will throw a stick in the YEC's direction and answer, "They only see a loss of genetic information from generation to generation, so Noah & Co must have had all the genetic information required of the current human race". Something like that.

Okay, keep in mind I am a lay person here, would this be something like a "super genome"? Would this be an explanation for the so called "junk DNA"? ... Or is there another explanation?

While I've encountered bizarre genetic bs to explain the lack of evidence for a genetic bottleneck (all the non-coding regions of DNA used to contain all the information for all the genetic diversity observed today, and after the flood genomes worked in an absurd way to fix all the problems the flood caused -- thanks God), the best explanation I've encountered is probably that no evidence would be expected.

Alone this claim doesn't seem like much, but there's a nice example of a recent genetic bottleneck where genetic diversity is retained -- the introduction of European rabbits to Australia. Despite an initial population of 13 rabbits, observed genetic diversity doesn't resemble what would be expected from repeated founder effects or a bottleneck of a 13 rabbit population, but rather matches with European rabbit diversity quite nicely. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...]
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 1:46:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 1:11:09 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/24/2014 12:12:07 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 11:05:42 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

Not just for Humans either, but for essentially every species. I will throw a stick in the YEC's direction and answer, "They only see a loss of genetic information from generation to generation, so Noah & Co must have had all the genetic information required of the current human race". Something like that.

Okay, keep in mind I am a lay person here, would this be something like a "super genome"? Would this be an explanation for the so called "junk DNA"? ... Or is there another explanation?

While I've encountered bizarre genetic bs to explain the lack of evidence for a genetic bottleneck (all the non-coding regions of DNA used to contain all the information for all the genetic diversity observed today, and after the flood genomes worked in an absurd way to fix all the problems the flood caused -- thanks God), the best explanation I've encountered is probably that no evidence would be expected.

Alone this claim doesn't seem like much, but there's a nice example of a recent genetic bottleneck where genetic diversity is retained -- the introduction of European rabbits to Australia. Despite an initial population of 13 rabbits, observed genetic diversity doesn't resemble what would be expected from repeated founder effects or a bottleneck of a 13 rabbit population, but rather matches with European rabbit diversity quite nicely. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...]

Not to mention the adaption that allowed them to survive the myxoma virus we deliberately released in an attempt to control/eradicate the population. The surviving rabbits from the epidemic were resistant to the disease, and now it no longer works.
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 3:12:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 10:28:59 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

You are overlooking the "YEC" in the forum title. I am specifically referring to the flood in young Earth Creationists interpretations, which is a global account.

I don't suppose you *have* to believe in a global flood to be a YEC, but, point taken.

I was a little kid when I first asked "How did we get black and white and Asian and all from Adam and Eve?" It's really the same question, from a macroscopic point of view.
This space for rent.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 3:30:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 12:12:07 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 2/24/2014 11:05:42 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

Not just for Humans either, but for essentially every species. I will throw a stick in the YEC's direction and answer, "They only see a loss of genetic information from generation to generation, so Noah & Co must have had all the genetic information required of the current human race". Something like that.

Okay, keep in mind I am a lay person here, would this be something like a "super genome"? Would this be an explanation for the so called "junk DNA"? ... Or is there another explanation?

More like super evolution. Realizing the amount of diversity we see that must have its origins from 2 pairs of a single "Kind" of species on the ark, requires this super fast accelerated evolution.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 3:36:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 9:36:00 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

lol at you're last paragraph. Yeah, my inner thought to "I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it" ". was "No, that's exactly what you're hoping for, otherwise you wouldn't have thrown the slogan into the conversation"

id say theres a difference between hoping and expecting. In terms of having an actual, decent, intelligent conversation, I would hope for some answer beyond "God dun it". But its certainly an answer that I would expect.

But I also don't think the flood has to be global. In fact, there's clues in the text itself:
- "the Nephilim were in the land in those days, and also afterwards"
- the reference to 20 foot depth - obviously the ancients knew as well as us that 20' (in cubits, I'm sure) is a very small dimension relative to mountains.
- God sent a wind to dry the land - how would that help if flooding was universal?

Dont YECs already have a rationalization for these, though? I mean, in regards to Nephilim, depending on your interpretation of what a nephilim is, angels(Fallen or otherwise) could easily have come down to earth and bred with humans after the flood. And the explanation for mountains and valleys is that they formed after the flood, meaning that 20 foot depth was more than enough to cover the entire planet with water.

But for your last one.... How else is the land gonna dry? And if there was dry land before, then why bother drying the land?
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 4:20:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

If this is the case then the story of the flood does not disagree with evolution at all. Unfortunately there are those who insist thT the flood must have covered the entire earth, and every living organism on this planet must have died, with the exception of those on the ark. I have even met Christians who insisted that all sea creatures, birds, and microbes died in that flood. It is Christians like these, who insist on the scientifically impossible, and deny the scientific mandatory, that annoy people like myself and scepticalone. Science and evolution are compatible with most non-hardcore/extremist interpretations of the scripture.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 5:34:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 9:36:00 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

lol at you're last paragraph. Yeah, my inner thought to "I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it" ". was "No, that's exactly what you're hoping for, otherwise you wouldn't have thrown the slogan into the conversation"

But I also don't think the flood has to be global.

But it does, unless you don't subscribe to Genesis (which wouldn't make much sense since I think you subscribe to the Flood because of Genesis).

""I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created"and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground"for I regret that I have made them"

"I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark"


Furthermore, God promised never to send another flood like Noah"s Flood (9:11,15), but there have been many local floods, even regional floods, since Noah"s time. If Noah"s Flood was only local, then God lied to us. Likewise, there was no need for Noah to build an ark for his survival. He had up to 120 years" warning (6:3), long enough to walk anywhere on the earth, certainly out of the region of the coming local flood.(1)

(1) http://creation.com...
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 6:28:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 5:34:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:36:00 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

lol at you're last paragraph. Yeah, my inner thought to "I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it" ". was "No, that's exactly what you're hoping for, otherwise you wouldn't have thrown the slogan into the conversation"

But I also don't think the flood has to be global.

But it does, unless you don't subscribe to Genesis (which wouldn't make much sense since I think you subscribe to the Flood because of Genesis).

""I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created"and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground"for I regret that I have made them"

"I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark"


Furthermore, God promised never to send another flood like Noah"s Flood (9:11,15), but there have been many local floods, even regional floods, since Noah"s time. If Noah"s Flood was only local, then God lied to us. Likewise, there was no need for Noah to build an ark for his survival. He had up to 120 years" warning (6:3), long enough to walk anywhere on the earth, certainly out of the region of the coming local flood.(1)

(1) http://creation.com...

Wait, in genesis god said that he regrets having made them?! Now I remember why I don't believe in the bible in the first place. God regrets his creation. So God didn't know that they would go astray in the first place? In other words, god is not omniscient? God is not in control?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 6:43:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

Whats interesting is that even if we consider a local flood. The exact same question arises.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2014 7:55:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 6:28:37 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/24/2014 5:34:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:36:00 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

lol at you're last paragraph. Yeah, my inner thought to "I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it" ". was "No, that's exactly what you're hoping for, otherwise you wouldn't have thrown the slogan into the conversation"

But I also don't think the flood has to be global.

But it does, unless you don't subscribe to Genesis (which wouldn't make much sense since I think you subscribe to the Flood because of Genesis).

""I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created"and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground"for I regret that I have made them"

"I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark"


Furthermore, God promised never to send another flood like Noah"s Flood (9:11,15), but there have been many local floods, even regional floods, since Noah"s time. If Noah"s Flood was only local, then God lied to us. Likewise, there was no need for Noah to build an ark for his survival. He had up to 120 years" warning (6:3), long enough to walk anywhere on the earth, certainly out of the region of the coming local flood.(1)

(1) http://creation.com...

Wait, in genesis god said that he regrets having made them?! Now I remember why I don't believe in the bible in the first place. God regrets his creation. So God didn't know that they would go astray in the first place? In other words, god is not omniscient? God is not in control?

God did not actually repent. That's an artifact of translation; the actual Hebrew word can mean lots of things:

http://www.lexiconcordance.com...
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2014 7:49:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 5:34:26 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:36:00 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 9:27:57 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 2/23/2014 5:08:27 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
If Noah's flood happened 4300-4500 years ago, we should be able to see a genetic bottleneck rougly corresponding to this period. Is there any evidence of this in the genetic record?

You're taking the story of the flood totally out of context. In the Bible the flood specifically hits a part of Noah's world. Back in those days, people believed there were different parts of the world according to different people's perspectives. Noah's world could have been a small area in between the mountains in the Bible, thus explaining the lack of a genetic bottleneck.

*wonders why he typed all this out when the author of the forum has no intention of believing him*

lol at you're last paragraph. Yeah, my inner thought to "I will admit I was hoping for better than, "God did it" ". was "No, that's exactly what you're hoping for, otherwise you wouldn't have thrown the slogan into the conversation"

But I also don't think the flood has to be global.

But it does, unless you don't subscribe to Genesis (which wouldn't make much sense since I think you subscribe to the Flood because of Genesis).

Well, I gave textual reasons for my position, so it's not that I'm discarding Genesis.

The more I study this stuff, the more I think that 'creation ex nihilo' is something that was inserted by theologians and has really prejudiced our reading of the text. First, the human mind cannot have a concept of 'creation from nothing'. It's just words, the human mind cannot conceive of creating from nothing. And I don't think the scriptures present that. Like Jesus in the boat, Genesis presents God as the master and owner of the cosmos, rather than as a magician snapping his fingers and making things appear from nothing. The original creation is only the first phrase of the Bible: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth". Everything after that is creation from the dust of the ground and such. So the story is much narrower. The point is a trumpet fanfare: "Attention! Here is the Creator!", rather than "here's how the creator made the world from nothing"

Think of this: You'll hear people say "the first thing God created was light". But that's just flat out wrong. The text begins with "and the earth was formless...". So earth was already created. Kind of obvious, but we can really be blinded by preconceptions, ya know? And, the point of all this, is to not come to the text with a certain preconception, but to try to read it fresh, using clues from history, archeology, and yes, science.


""I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race

Well, it's literally "I will destroy Adam". "Human race" is a translator's interpretation. Much like Jews are 'Israel' after their ancestor, we are all the tribe of Adam. And the Hebrew word is translated as either earth or 'the land'. I don't think the writer would have had a concept of the globe. God did, of course, but interpreting an ancient text from the context of its author, I'm not sure we need to think of the whole planet.

I have created"and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground"for I regret that I have made them"

"I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark"


Furthermore, God promised never to send another flood like Noah"s Flood (9:11,15),

Well, I'm sure it was big flood. And I'm not saying I rule out a global flood, just thinking out loud, as it were.

but there have been many local floods, even regional floods, since Noah"s time. If Noah"s Flood was only local, then God lied to us. Likewise, there was no need for Noah to build an ark for his survival. He had up to 120 years" warning (6:3), long enough to walk anywhere on the earth, certainly out of the region of the coming local flood.(1)


Well, but an ark was how God chose to save Noah. It was a living parable of sorts.

So look, the last thing I want to do is challenge God's word. But ya just have to be careful you're really defending God's word and not what somebody said about God's word.
This space for rent.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2014 8:06:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/24/2014 6:28:37 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
...

Wait, in genesis god said that he regrets having made them?! Now I remember why I don't believe in the bible in the first place. God regrets his creation. So God didn't know that they would go astray in the first place? In other words, god is not omniscient? God is not in control?

Boy, this is so hard to address in a short post, but let me take a crack at it: We humans have a strong tendency to interpret the infinite in a way that makes it nothing. Imagine, if you will, a black sheet of paper. We know that black means no color, virtually nothing is reflecting off the paper. Now imagine a white sheet of paper. Now we have all colors reflecting off the paper. We have infinite, omni-color. But we also call that a blank sheet of paper. A pure white paper conveys no information.

So it is only when we have limited color that we can have information. It might be black and white text, or it might be a picture, worth a thousand words. So this is a little hint perhaps of how an infinite God must not be understood in a trivial way. Think how boring it would be to be everywhere all at once. You could never go out for dinner. It worries me how close I personally am to knowing everything - what am I going to do once I reach the end of the internet?

The Bible doesn't present the bland infinite we might have invented. One of the reasons I believe in YHWH is precisely because he is jealous and angry and changes his mind. The authors did not share the distortions of the pagans, nor the Greeks, nor the modern western mind. No, the real God must be "all that and more". He must be at least as emotional as humans. He must be at least as interesting and challenging as a woman, else he can't be the maker of Eve. And so on.

I think C.S. Lewis, with his remarkable combination of the logical and the poetic put it best, about Aslan, his allegorical Jesus: "After all, he's not a tame lion".
This space for rent.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2014 8:33:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/25/2014 8:06:11 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 6:28:37 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
...

Wait, in genesis god said that he regrets having made them?! Now I remember why I don't believe in the bible in the first place. God regrets his creation. So God didn't know that they would go astray in the first place? In other words, god is not omniscient? God is not in control?

Boy, this is so hard to address in a short post, but let me take a crack at it: We humans have a strong tendency to interpret the infinite in a way that makes it nothing. Imagine, if you will, a black sheet of paper. We know that black means no color, virtually nothing is reflecting off the paper. Now imagine a white sheet of paper. Now we have all colors reflecting off the paper. We have infinite, omni-color. But we also call that a blank sheet of paper. A pure white paper conveys no information.

So it is only when we have limited color that we can have information. It might be black and white text, or it might be a picture, worth a thousand words. So this is a little hint perhaps of how an infinite God must not be understood in a trivial way. Think how boring it would be to be everywhere all at once. You could never go out for dinner. It worries me how close I personally am to knowing everything - what am I going to do once I reach the end of the internet?

The Bible doesn't present the bland infinite we might have invented. One of the reasons I believe in YHWH is precisely because he is jealous and angry and changes his mind. The authors did not share the distortions of the pagans, nor the Greeks, nor the modern western mind. No, the real God must be "all that and more". He must be at least as emotional as humans. He must be at least as interesting and challenging as a woman, else he can't be the maker of Eve. And so on.

I think C.S. Lewis, with his remarkable combination of the logical and the poetic put it best, about Aslan, his allegorical Jesus: "After all, he's not a tame lion".

I will be frank with you. It would seem that with the attributes you ascribe to god, you worship an imperfect lord. To me, this is blasphemy. The God that I worship is free and above that which you ascribe to him.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2014 9:06:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/25/2014 8:33:19 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/25/2014 8:06:11 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 6:28:37 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
...

Wait, in genesis god said that he regrets having made them?! Now I remember why I don't believe in the bible in the first place. God regrets his creation. So God didn't know that they would go astray in the first place? In other words, god is not omniscient? God is not in control?

Boy, this is so hard to address in a short post, but let me take a crack at it: We humans have a strong tendency to interpret the infinite in a way that makes it nothing. Imagine, if you will, a black sheet of paper. We know that black means no color, virtually nothing is reflecting off the paper. Now imagine a white sheet of paper. Now we have all colors reflecting off the paper. We have infinite, omni-color. But we also call that a blank sheet of paper. A pure white paper conveys no information.

So it is only when we have limited color that we can have information. It might be black and white text, or it might be a picture, worth a thousand words. So this is a little hint perhaps of how an infinite God must not be understood in a trivial way. Think how boring it would be to be everywhere all at once. You could never go out for dinner. It worries me how close I personally am to knowing everything - what am I going to do once I reach the end of the internet?

The Bible doesn't present the bland infinite we might have invented. One of the reasons I believe in YHWH is precisely because he is jealous and angry and changes his mind. The authors did not share the distortions of the pagans, nor the Greeks, nor the modern western mind. No, the real God must be "all that and more". He must be at least as emotional as humans. He must be at least as interesting and challenging as a woman, else he can't be the maker of Eve. And so on.

I think C.S. Lewis, with his remarkable combination of the logical and the poetic put it best, about Aslan, his allegorical Jesus: "After all, he's not a tame lion".

I will be frank with you. It would seem that with the attributes you ascribe to god, you worship an imperfect lord. To me, this is blasphemy. The God that I worship is free and above that which you ascribe to him.

He is not above, but below. You have chosen a God who doesn't even have the passion of a human father.
This space for rent.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2014 11:09:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/25/2014 9:06:12 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/25/2014 8:33:19 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/25/2014 8:06:11 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 2/24/2014 6:28:37 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
...

Wait, in genesis god said that he regrets having made them?! Now I remember why I don't believe in the bible in the first place. God regrets his creation. So God didn't know that they would go astray in the first place? In other words, god is not omniscient? God is not in control?

Boy, this is so hard to address in a short post, but let me take a crack at it: We humans have a strong tendency to interpret the infinite in a way that makes it nothing. Imagine, if you will, a black sheet of paper. We know that black means no color, virtually nothing is reflecting off the paper. Now imagine a white sheet of paper. Now we have all colors reflecting off the paper. We have infinite, omni-color. But we also call that a blank sheet of paper. A pure white paper conveys no information.

So it is only when we have limited color that we can have information. It might be black and white text, or it might be a picture, worth a thousand words. So this is a little hint perhaps of how an infinite God must not be understood in a trivial way. Think how boring it would be to be everywhere all at once. You could never go out for dinner. It worries me how close I personally am to knowing everything - what am I going to do once I reach the end of the internet?

The Bible doesn't present the bland infinite we might have invented. One of the reasons I believe in YHWH is precisely because he is jealous and angry and changes his mind. The authors did not share the distortions of the pagans, nor the Greeks, nor the modern western mind. No, the real God must be "all that and more". He must be at least as emotional as humans. He must be at least as interesting and challenging as a woman, else he can't be the maker of Eve. And so on.

I think C.S. Lewis, with his remarkable combination of the logical and the poetic put it best, about Aslan, his allegorical Jesus: "After all, he's not a tame lion".

I will be frank with you. It would seem that with the attributes you ascribe to god, you worship an imperfect lord. To me, this is blasphemy. The God that I worship is free and above that which you ascribe to him.

He is not above, but below. You have chosen a God who doesn't even have the passion of a human father.

I say again, this is why I don't believe in the bible.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
v3nesl
Posts: 4,463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2014 11:49:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/25/2014 11:09:08 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
...

I say again, this is why I don't believe in the bible.

And you're hoping God cares what you believe, aren't you?
This space for rent.