[_ Old Earth _] Creationist theory of adaptation

[Patashu]

Mitochondrial EVE is a given today. The DNA comes only from the mother and all races of man are now known to have only ONE mother.

Y-Chromosome ADAM is ALSO a given today. This is another case where you only inherit from the paternal sideare wayyyyy down the wrong road.

Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam lived 30,000 years apart...

And way more than six thousand years ago, anyway. The names given to them are a bit of a misnomer; they are merely last common ancestors for PARTS of the genome universal to humans today, not by any means the first humans.

 

[Patashu]

But here's the problem; there are millions of species identified in the world today (hundreds and thousands of beetle species alone for example), yet Noah's Ark only had finite space. Where did all these new species come from since the flood?

1. We do not have "infinite species" nor do we have the ability even by Darwinian standards to define species precisely.

Still thousands and thousands of different kinds of insects and bettles. Think of poor Noah, having to get exactly two of each pair, keep them on the ark, monitor them all and feed/cater to them all specifically! And the ark can only be so big. And we haven't even started on plants or fish which would have to be taken on the ark somehow. Also, which of Noah's sons carried herpes to the new world? It's an honest question, diseases and viruses don't spring from nowhere (as we now know thanks to modern microbiology and germ theory)

2. The "salient" argument of atheist darwinianism is that all species come from a common ancestor. This point has never been proven to be true.

It is supported by the evidence of all species fitting into a twin nested hierarchy, morphologically molecularly and genetically. It has all the traits and patterns of coming about from a single common ancestor via speciation via natural selection and mutation. It hasn't been 'proven' but science does not try to prove things; it tries to provide evidence for them, and so it has.

[quote:e3283]
In addition, in humans today we see up to dozens of different alleles in the same genetic locus, yet Noah and his wife and sons couldn't have had more than 8 different alleles at the same genetic locus (at most, this is assuming complete heterozyny). Where did the extra alleles come from?

Mitochondrial EVE is a given today. The DNA comes only from the mother and all races of man are now known to have only ONE mother.

Y-Chromosome ADAM is ALSO a given today. This is another case where you only inherit from the paternal side and we know that ALL humans came from ONE Man --

Atheist Darwinism loses ground whenever it is exposed to "the light of day".

This result is "easily a prediction" of the Creationist model for origins. It is "a shocking surprise" for the atheist darwinist model because it assumes "a one in a zillion lucky shot" and each time you get a "just so... one in a zillion lucky shot" story piled on top of story -- you have "a clue" you are wayyyyy down the wrong road.

in Christ,

Bob[/quote:e3283]

You have not answered my question. Even though they are pokingfunningly called 'adam' and 'eve' the fact is that they are only most recent common ancestors for parts of the genome respectively, and lived thousands of years apart and are not theorized to be the FIRST humans. Even if you were correct you have not answered my question of where all this extra 'genetic information' has come from if evolution is not responsible.

 

[John]

Still thousands and thousands of different kinds of insects and bettles. Think of poor Noah, having to get exactly two of each pair, keep them on the ark, monitor them all and feed/cater to them all specifically! And the ark can only be so big. And we haven't even started on plants or fish which would have to be taken on the ark somehow. Also, which of Noah's sons carried herpes to the new world? It's an honest question, diseases and viruses don't spring from nowhere (as we now know thanks to modern microbiology and germ theory)

Noah did not bring insects or plants and there was plenty of water outside for the fish :wink:

Genesis 7:2 states that Noah saved two of every representative "kind" of land animal on the ark. Noah would have taken young specimens, not huge, older creatures

Only land-dwelling, air-breathing animals had to be included on the ark (Gen. 7:15, "in which is the breath of life," 7:22). Noah did not need to bring all the thousands of insects varieties.

Noahs ark was big
When "Noah's Ark" is found it will be the greatest archeological and anthropological discovery of all time. Finding an ancient wooden sea vessel, large enough to hold two of every basic type of land dwelling animal, buried high on Mt, Ararat would have the following implications:
Search for the Truth This article is one of many found within Mr. Malone's excellent book, Search for the Truth.

* It would confirm that the entire surface of the planet had been covered by water within the last 6000 years.
* It would confirm the factual basis for the flood legend which is present in every human culture on the planet.
* It would again confirm reliability of the Biblical record of the human race.
* It would mean that every land animal (including humans) has descended from the inhabitants of the Ark.
* It would take more faith than ever to cling to the theory that man descended from ape-like creatures.
* The fossils would have to be interpreted as mainly a result of this flood, not the result of slow accumulation over time.

The alleged ark is yet to be discovered by a qualified team of scientists, but many seemingly reliable sources have claimed to have seen it. For more information on Noah's ark an excellent technical resource is : Noah's Ark: A feasibility Study by John Woodmorappe.

According to the Biblical text, Noah had over 100 years to build the ark which would have been an unmistakable witness to the impending judgment of God. Jesus not only referred to this event as a fact of history, but tied his imminent return to a time when the state of affairs on earth would be similar to those at the time of Noah (Matthew 24:37-39). If and when the ark is found, there will once again be an enormous monument pointing toward impending judgment. My hope when this happens is that those who have not placed their faith in Christ will wake up and do so because their opportunity may end soon.

The most common question asked about the validity of Noah's ark is, "How could millions of different animals fit on one small boat?"

* First, there were not millions of animals. Not every "kind" of animal was needed to be on board. According to the Biblical text., neither insects nor amphibians would have been taken on board. Only those animals which could not have survived a year long flood needed to be on board. Furthermore, every minor variation of animal (species) was not present. Wolves, foxes, coyote, and dogs could have come from an original dog kind.
* Making the generous assumption that the average animal size is as large as a sheep, and between 2 and 7 of each kind of animal were taken, 16,000 sheep-size animals, at the most, would have been on board. This number could have been as low as 2000 if the Biblical "kind" is equivalent to the family level of modern animal classification. These numbers include every known living and extinct type of mammal, bird, amphibian, and reptile.
* This was no small boat. Noah and his family had over 100 years to construct a vessel longer that a football field and three stories high. The total space available was equivalent to 522 railroad stock cars. A stock car holds 240 sheep so the ark could have held 125,000 animals.
* At most, only 40% of the total space was needed for all of the animals! The remainder would be used for food and storage.

The account of Noah's flood is similar to many other Biblical stories. They make perfect sense if you assume they mean exactly what they say and take time to study them carefully.
Source http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=28

 

[Patashu]

Still thousands and thousands of different kinds of insects and bettles. Think of poor Noah, having to get exactly two of each pair, keep them on the ark, monitor them all and feed/cater to them all specifically! And the ark can only be so big. And we haven't even started on plants or fish which would have to be taken on the ark somehow. Also, which of Noah's sons carried herpes to the new world? It's an honest question, diseases and viruses don't spring from nowhere (as we now know thanks to modern microbiology and germ theory)

Noah did not bring insects or plants and there was plenty of water outside for the fish :wink:

So how did the insects survive?
So how did the plants survive?
Problem: Almost all varieties of fish can only survive in either fresh water or salt water. A flood would have diffused sales equally throughout and thus you're killing off about half of all kinds of fish if you don't take them on the ark. (But, of course, if you were writing genesis you wouldn't know this, nor the fact that creatures like flies aren't the products of spontaneous generation ;) )

Genesis 7:2 states that Noah saved two of every representative "kind" of land animal on the ark. Noah would have taken young specimens, not huge, older creatures

Young creatures suffer without the guidance of a parent to teach them essential skills and how to hunt and interact with the environment. They need parents just as much as we do.

Only land-dwelling, air-breathing animals had to be included on the ark (Gen. 7:15, "in which is the breath of life," 7:22). Noah did not need to bring all the thousands of insects varieties.

Insects have spiracles and plants respire. Besides, if you don't take them they'll perish in the flood.

Noahs ark was big
When "Noah's Ark" is found it will be the greatest archeological and anthropological discovery of all time. Finding an ancient wooden sea vessel, large enough to hold two of every basic type of land dwelling animal, buried high on Mt, Ararat would have the following implications:
Search for the Truth This article is one of many found within Mr. Malone's excellent book, Search for the Truth.

* It would confirm that the entire surface of the planet had been covered by water within the last 6000 years.
* It would confirm the factual basis for the flood legend which is present in every human culture on the planet.
* It would again confirm reliability of the Biblical record of the human race.
* It would mean that every land animal (including humans) has descended from the inhabitants of the Ark.
* It would take more faith than ever to cling to the theory that man descended from ape-like creatures.
* The fossils would have to be interpreted as mainly a result of this flood, not the result of slow accumulation over time.

The alleged ark is yet to be discovered by a qualified team of scientists, but many seemingly reliable sources have claimed to have seen it. For more information on Noah's ark an excellent technical resource is : Noah's Ark: A feasibility Study by John Woodmorappe.

Noah's Ark has never been found; it has been claimed to be found but no evidence has been put forth. Saying what will happen if you do find it is merely hypothetical.

From Talk Origins:
"Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. The longest wooden ships in modern seas are about 300 feet, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped. The ark was 450 feet long [ Gen. 6:15]. Could an ark that size be made seaworthy?"

And think about how turbulent the ocean must have been during the flood. The water intake must have caused sheerly catastrophic effects.

According to the Biblical text, Noah had over 100 years to build the ark which would have been an unmistakable witness to the impending judgment of God. Jesus not only referred to this event as a fact of history, but tied his imminent return to a time when the state of affairs on earth would be similar to those at the time of Noah (Matthew 24:37-39). If and when the ark is found, there will once again be an enormous monument pointing toward impending judgment. My hope when this happens is that those who have not placed their faith in Christ will wake up and do so because their opportunity may end soon.

The most common question asked about the validity of Noah's ark is, "How could millions of different animals fit on one small boat?"

* First, there were not millions of animals. Not every "kind" of animal was needed to be on board. According to the Biblical text., neither insects nor amphibians would have been taken on board. Only those animals which could not have survived a year long flood needed to be on board. Furthermore, every minor variation of animal (species) was not present. Wolves, foxes, coyote, and dogs could have come from an original dog kind.

The problem with this argument is that there is no known mechanism for the 'hyperevolution' or 'hyperadaption' required to separate these kinds out into the thousands of species we see today BEFORE modern times come and they are all documented. You're always complaining about evolutionists not knowing where genetic information comes from, but in your scenario you'd need a mutation rate at least a thousand times higher (equivalent to a fatal dose of radiation) to get all the neccesary species and alleles present at every genetic locus (ie variation) in such a comparatively short time.

* Making the generous assumption that the average animal size is as large as a sheep, and between 2 and 7 of each kind of animal were taken, 16,000 sheep-size animals, at the most, would have been on board. This number could have been as low as 2000 if the Biblical "kind" is equivalent to the family level of modern animal classification. These numbers include every known living and extinct type of mammal, bird, amphibian, and reptile.

You also need room to store their food, water, environments, living space for Noah and his wife and sons, rooms and space for things that keep the boat structurally sound, etc etc. He also needs to keep careful track of each and every pair of species AND provide a specific type of food unique to them. How is he preserving all this food and meat, anyway? The refrigerator hasn't been invented yet.

* This was no small boat. Noah and his family had over 100 years to construct a vessel longer that a football field and three stories high. The total space available was equivalent to 522 railroad stock cars. A stock car holds 240 sheep so the ark could have held 125,000 animals.

A stock car holds 240 sheep back to back for short durations, not with the intention of feeding and sheltering them for a YEAR. Not comparable at all. And there's only so big you can make wooden vessels before they become unseaworthy.

* At most, only 40% of the total space was needed for all of the animals! The remainder would be used for food and storage.

Cramped! Do you take up 40% of your house?

 

[jmm9683]

Will people stop posting quotes by Kent Hovind trying to pass them off as some sort of authority on anything. The literal interpretation of the Great Flood and Noah's Ark has been proven false. Deal with it.

 

[John]

So how did the insects survive?

One floating dead stuff ? not sure.

The problem with this argument is that there is no known mechanism for the 'hyperevolution' or 'hyperadaption' required to separate these kinds out into the thousands of species we see today BEFORE modern times come and they are all documented. You're always complaining about evolutionists not knowing where genetic information comes from, but in your scenario you'd need a mutation rate at least a thousand times higher (equivalent to a fatal dose of radiation) to get all the neccesary species and alleles present at every genetic locus (ie variation) in such a comparatively short time.

Look at all the dogs we have, thousands of breeds, all in the last 4400+/- years why not other specis ?

You also need room to store their food, water, environments, living space for Noah and his wife and sons, rooms and space for things that keep the boat structurally sound, etc etc. He also needs to keep careful track of each and every pair of species AND provide a specific type of food unique to them. How is he preserving all this food and meat, anyway? The refrigerator hasn't been invented yet.

They lived with the animals, not too strange..my dogs sleeps on my bed each night, lol
if the animals hibernate then food supply would be short on purpose.

. And there's only so big you can make wooden vessels before they become unseaworthy.

see moonpool above

Cramped! Do you take up 40% of your house?

i would have to say yes, lol i am a pack rat, and personal comfort on the ark was probly less then ideal, but its that or die.

 

[John]

Will people stop posting quotes by Kent Hovind trying to pass them off as some sort of authority on anything. The literal interpretation of the Great Flood and Noah's Ark has been proven false. Deal with it.

stop trolling.

 

[Patashu]

So how did the insects survive?

[quote:9c650]One floating dead stuff ? not sure.

The problem with this argument is that there is no known mechanism for the 'hyperevolution' or 'hyperadaption' required to separate these kinds out into the thousands of species we see today BEFORE modern times come and they are all documented. You're always complaining about evolutionists not knowing where genetic information comes from, but in your scenario you'd need a mutation rate at least a thousand times higher (equivalent to a fatal dose of radiation) to get all the neccesary species and alleles present at every genetic locus (ie variation) in such a comparatively short time.

Look at all the dogs we have, thousands of breeds, all in the last 4400+/- years why not other specis ?[/quote:9c650]
Two things here:
1. Artificial selection brings out traits faster than natural selection because it is not probabilistic as to which members survive, it is deterministic. Who artificially selected amongst the other species?
2. They are still only dog breeds, not new species; they are technically all part of one ring species.
3. The huge variance in dog breeds we see today is only possible because of the vast gene pool of possible mutations to select from that existed in the first place; if there was a huge genetic bottleneck due to Noah's Flood as was suggested, there would not be nearly enough variance to account for all dog breeds we see today. Mutations only come so fast.

[quote:9c650]You also need room to store their food, water, environments, living space for Noah and his wife and sons, rooms and space for things that keep the boat structurally sound, etc etc. He also needs to keep careful track of each and every pair of species AND provide a specific type of food unique to them. How is he preserving all this food and meat, anyway? The refrigerator hasn't been invented yet.

They lived with the animals, not too strange..my dogs sleeps on my bed each night, lol
if the animals hibernate then food supply would be short on purpose. [/quote:9c650]
Not all animals hibernate. Even the ones that do would be awake during spring and summer. In addition, the water canopy model creationists like to use would suggest that no seasons existed before the flood, as the climate would have been uniformly distributed throughout by this light-scattering canopy. Why then did the animals even have a mechanism to hibernate?

[quote:9c650]
. And there's only so big you can make wooden vessels before they become unseaworthy.

see moonpool above

Cramped! Do you take up 40% of your house?

i would have to say yes, lol i am a pack rat, and personal comfort on the ark was probly less then ideal, but its that or die.[/quote:9c650][/quote]

How did Noah convince the animals that this cramped, artificial, wooden, unnatural environment would be good for them? How did they not suffer from lack of natural environment, natural stimuli, interaction with pack members and parents, lack of natural sources of hunting, food and water, etc? How did they adjust to the post-flood world once again? By then they would have matured (without any parents and with a year of no exposure to natural life and environment!), and once you have matured it is harder to make such huge adjustments like this.

 

[John]

Two things here:
1. Artificial selection brings out traits faster than natural selection because it is not probabilistic as to which members survive, it is deterministic. Who artificially selected amongst the other species?
2. They are still only dog breeds, not new species; they are technically all part of one ring species.
3. The huge variance in dog breeds we see today is only possible because of the vast gene pool of possible mutations to select from that existed in the first place; if there was a huge genetic bottleneck due to Noah's Flood as was suggested, there would not be nearly enough variance to account for all dog breeds we see today. Mutations only come so fast.

Thats actually 3 but who's counting :P

1. Humans did of course, from Noah to us.
2.Dog,Wolf,hyena,Coyote,Dingo etc etc ? they are listed as different species
3. Vast gene pool yes, Mutations no. Why is it not possible ? if Noah saved all the respective "Kinds' of animals, and all we have today is variants of those respective "Kinds" i see no reason to doubt.

Not all animals hibernate. Even the ones that do would be awake during spring and summer. In addition, the water canopy model creationists like to use would suggest that no seasons existed before the flood, as the climate would have been uniformly distributed throughout by this light-scattering canopy. Why then did the animals even have a mechanism to hibernate?

I am not referring to hibernating like a bear does for the winter months, i simply implied that they go into a "Hibernative State" brought on my bad weather.
I am not too sure about the water canopy thing, i never really debated, i'll start another thread, i believe i heard about this from Dr. Kent hovind, but i like to question everything, Hovind is no exception.

How did Noah convince the animals that this cramped, artificial, wooden, unnatural environment would be good for them? How did they not suffer from lack of natural environment, natural stimuli, interaction with pack members and parents, lack of natural sources of hunting, food and water, etc? How did they adjust to the post-flood world once again? By then they would have matured (without any parents and with a year of no exposure to natural life and environment!), and once you have matured it is harder to make such huge adjustments like this.

[/quote]

Noah could talk to the animals , LOL joking. If god brought them into the ark, i am pretty sure the miracle would not end when a picky kangaroo got to the door and said" i don't think so , god"

Symbolic relationships could have easily came about after the flood as it did before, adaptation is a truly remarkable thing.

 

[Patashu]

Two things here:
1. Artificial selection brings out traits faster than natural selection because it is not probabilistic as to which members survive, it is deterministic. Who artificially selected amongst the other species?
2. They are still only dog breeds, not new species; they are technically all part of one ring species.
3. The huge variance in dog breeds we see today is only possible because of the vast gene pool of possible mutations to select from that existed in the first place; if there was a huge genetic bottleneck due to Noah's Flood as was suggested, there would not be nearly enough variance to account for all dog breeds we see today. Mutations only come so fast.

Thats actually 3 but who's counting :P

That's what I get for restructuring my argument half way through I guess :P

1. Humans did of course, from Noah to us.

Humans have not imposed artificial selection apon spiders, insects, moths, beetles, etc. We do not have breeders sitting in the furthest reaches of the wilderness and jungle to artificially speciate all those beetles.

2.Dog,Wolf,hyena,Coyote,Dingo etc etc ? they are listed as different species

They are all CANINES. We're talking about dogs, and despite all the breeds there is still only one 'dog' species.

3. Vast gene pool yes, Mutations no. Why is it not possible ? if Noah saved all the respective "Kinds' of animals, and all we have today is variants of those respective "Kinds" i see no reason to doubt.

There is no vast gene pool because Noah did not take more than a pair of dogs at the most (it may have even only been a pair of canines, depending on your interpretation!).
There are not enough mutations to account for the diversity we see in dog breeds today if we assume there was a genetic bottleneck of one pair about four thousand years ago). Mutations only occur so fast, and it is impossible to select for traits that do not exist.

[quote:537a3]
Not all animals hibernate. Even the ones that do would be awake during spring and summer. In addition, the water canopy model creationists like to use would suggest that no seasons existed before the flood, as the climate would have been uniformly distributed throughout by this light-scattering canopy. Why then did the animals even have a mechanism to hibernate?

I am not referring to hibernating like a bear does for the winter months, i simply implied that they go into a "Hibernative State" brought on my bad weather.[/quote:537a3]
Animals do not do this.

I am not too sure about the water canopy thing, i never really debated, i'll start another thread, i believe i heard about this from Dr. Kent hovind, but i like to question everything, Hovind is no exception.

Alright, cool. There's a lot about the water/ice/vapor canopy to discuss.

[quote:537a3]
How did Noah convince the animals that this cramped, artificial, wooden, unnatural environment would be good for them? How did they not suffer from lack of natural environment, natural stimuli, interaction with pack members and parents, lack of natural sources of hunting, food and water, etc? How did they adjust to the post-flood world once again? By then they would have matured (without any parents and with a year of no exposure to natural life and environment!), and once you have matured it is harder to make such huge adjustments like this.

[/quote:537a3]

Noah could talk to the animals , LOL joking. If god brought them into the ark, i am pretty sure the miracle would not end when a picky kangaroo got to the door and said" i don't think so , god"

Symbolic relationships could have easily came about after the flood as it did before, adaptation is a truly remarkable thing.[/quote]
What is the mechanism for adaption? How did the animals either know or were genetically programmed to 'adapt'? You cannot introduce a creature to an environment it did not evolve to be perfectly suited to and assume it will know what to do and act in an appropriate manner. And what would stop, say, the pair of lions from immediately pouncing on the pair of gazelle, et cetera? With such ridiculously low population samples all in one tiny part of the globe, extinction events are literally one death away.

 

[jwu]

2.Dog,Wolf,hyena,Coyote,Dingo etc etc ? they are listed as different species

They are all CANINES. We're talking about dogs, and despite all the breeds there is still only one 'dog' species.

I hate to backstab, but you're mistaken there:
Canis actually is the genus...dogs belong to the species canis lupus. Coyotes are canis latrans, a different species. While they most certainly can hybridize, they are reproductively isolated. Hyenas are feliformia, by the way - they are a species of cats, not dogs.

 

[Patashu]

2.Dog,Wolf,hyena,Coyote,Dingo etc etc ? they are listed as different species

They are all CANINES. We're talking about dogs, and despite all the breeds there is still only one 'dog' species.

I hate to backstab, but you're mistaken there:
Canis actually is the genus...dogs belong to the species canis lupus. Coyotes are canis latrans, a different species. While they most certainly can hybridize, they are reproductively isolated. Hyenas are feliformia, by the way - they are a species of cats, not dogs.

Sorry, that's what I meant, thanks for correcting me. (Didn't know the hyena part either)

 

[John]

So how did the plants survive?

3Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

he had every bird on the ark x 7

birds help to spread seeds of trees and plants, if there were just 1 hectar of land in the world after the flood resided i am pretty sure the birds could easily distribute all the seeds and within say 3 years the earth would have plenty vegetation,

 

[Patashu]

From Talk Origins:

# Most plants require established soils to grow--soils which would have been stripped by the Flood.
# Some plants germinate only after being exposed to fire or after being ingested by animals; these conditions would be rare (to put it mildly) after the Flood.
# Noah could not have gathered seeds for all plants because not all plants produce seeds, and a variety of plant seeds can't survive a year before germinating. [Garwood, 1989; Benzing, 1990; Densmore & Zasada, 1983] Also, how did he distribute them all over the world?

 

[Deep Thought]

Not to mention how Noah managed to obtain seeds for rare tropical plants and other plants not known about in the middle east.

The flood myth, more than any other YEC dogma, is a bit like the boy in Holland sticking his finger in the dyke to stop the water coming through, except in the YEC case, there are thousands of holes and only so many fingers. :

 

[BobRyan]

SOME of The myths gaffs blunders and hoaxes of the atheist darwinist stories are now well documented. Too many for any serious open minded objective student of the Bible and science to fall for them.

The TWO MILE high glacier covering North America "was a clue" to a world wide flood.

The fact of sea life fossils found at the tops of mountains a FACT in support of world wide flood.

Palonium radio halo evidence - FACT in favor of instant creation.

EVEN the atheist cosmologists now have to posit INSTANT CREATION of the universe zooming out to 130+ billion lightyears in about 3 minutes "from nothing".

y-chromosome Adam showing mankind descends from ONE male human. (AS the Bible said)

Mitochondrial Eve showing mankind descends from ONE mother. (As the Bible said)

The sad fact is - atheist darwinism does not do well in "the light of day" as REAL science examines the evidence!

And the BIBLE turns out to be trustworthy - even though believers in the junk science religion we know of as atheist darwinism -- attack the clear statements of God's Word "at every turn".

Then we have the OP supposedly asking about "adaption" and how our DNA based system could possibly allow for it. Is that fact about God's architecture and design of the DNA based system supposed to HELP atheist darwinism and hurt the Bible??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Patashu]

SOME of The myths gaffs blunders and hoaxes of the atheist darwinist stories are now well documented. Too many for any serious open minded objective student of the Bible and science to fall for them.

The TWO MILE high glacier covering North America "was a clue" to a world wide flood.

How so?

The fact of sea life fossils found at the tops of mountains a FACT in support of world wide flood.

If you completely ignore plate tectonics and their role in pushing up mountains where there was once flat ground, sure.

Palonium radio halo evidence - FACT in favor of instant creation.

Not quite.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html

EVEN the atheist cosmologists now have to posit INSTANT CREATION of the universe zooming out to 130+ billion lightyears in about 3 minutes "from nothing".

Big bang theory is not a theory of instant creation; the steps are well documented, and they all take finite amounts of time. You start out with a slightly heterogenous distribution of energy in the rapidly expanding universe. As the universe expands every point moves away from every other and thus the heat is spread out and the overall temperature cools. As it passes beyond certain threshold temperatures more and more complex particles are able to form and later bind together without the intense heat pushing them apart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Overview
By the way:
"Astronomical observations indicate that the universe is 13.73 ± 0.12 billion years old and at least 93 billion light years across."
This can not be reinterpreted to say that the universe expanded to 130+ billion light years in its first three minutes of existence. If you wish to critique a scientific theory you must use ITS numbers and predictions, not some half-assed reconstructions of what you've heard about it.

y-chromosome Adam showing mankind descends from ONE male human. (AS the Bible said)

Mitochondrial Eve showing mankind descends from ONE mother. (As the Bible said)

AGAIN. This will be the second or third time I have told you this:
Y-chromosome adam and mitochondrial eve were the last common ancestor for ONE part of the genome, NOT the first humans. They lived tens of thousands of years ago and thousands of years apart. In NO WAY can this be reinterpreted to fit in with the genesis account of adam and eve in the garden of eden.

The sad fact is - atheist darwinism does not do well in "the light of day" as REAL science examines the evidence!

Hmmm...what evidence? ;)

And the BIBLE turns out to be trustworthy - even though believers in the junk science religion we know of as atheist darwinism -- attack the clear statements of God's Word "at every turn".

If the bible is trustworthy, why is it that the Egyptians - who carefully and meticulously recorded their history - have absolutely nothing indicating Exodus happened? Archaeological evidence has also found nothing indicating a mass movement of millions of people out of Egypt and into the desert, nor the reprecussions of such an event.
In addition, find me archaeological evidence that the kingdoms of David and Solomon were as great as the bible indicates.

Then we have the OP supposedly asking about "adaption" and how our DNA based system could possibly allow for it. Is that fact about God's architecture and design of the DNA based system supposed to HELP atheist darwinism and hurt the Bible??

Unfortunately for you, it is a fact that there are more species and far more genetic variation in not just humans but all other life today than could be accounted for on Noah's one ark a mere few thousand years ago. If you wish to deny evolution and propose an incredible genetic bottleneck, it is up to you and YEC proponents to produce a hypothesis and observable mechanism for the extra genetic variety we see today that Noah could not have brought alone.

 

[BobRyan]

The fact of sea life fossils found at the tops of mountains a FACT in support of world wide flood.

If you completely ignore plate tectonics and their role in pushing up mountains where there was once flat ground, sure.

That above sequence "serves to illustrate" the reason that atheist darwinism "at all costs" is not a good objective model for logic.

In the case of plate techtonics - we don't know if the motion was early pre-life earth or post-life earth. Also the formation of islands and movement of contenants does nothing to negate the world-wide flood evidece of sea life at the tops of moutains.

The point above is that given the accurate and trustworthy nature of the Biblical account we EXPECT to find sea fossils EVEN at the tops of mountains.

Given plate techtonics we do not EXPECT to find that we simply allow that "it might happen in some cases" but it would not have to happen at all for plate techtonics since that science does not argue "all existing mountains had to be under the ocean for plate techtonics to work".

By constantly avoiding these logical flaws in the atheist darwinist argument - it survives among many non-Christians and even among a large number of Christians.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said -
Palonium radio halo evidence - FACT in favor of instant creation.

Not quite.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html

Gentry has fully debunked Talkorigins -- see his website for details. They simply are "stuck" in a "atheist darwinism at all costs" model.

The interesting thing here is that Gentry started out as an atheist darwinist himself until this discovery turned him around.

This is proof that even among the atheists there is evidence that they can be influenced by the data.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Patashu]

The fact of sea life fossils found at the tops of mountains a FACT in support of world wide flood.

[quote:11310]
If you completely ignore plate tectonics and their role in pushing up mountains where there was once flat ground, sure.

That above sequence "serves to illustrate" the reason that atheist darwinism "at all costs" is not a good objective model for logic.

In the case of plate techtonics - we don't know if the motion was early pre-life earth or post-life earth.[/quote:11310]
What do you mean? Plate tectonics is always in play. We can measure the movement now and we can infer the movement in the past thanks to lodestone keeping the charge that it had when it was formed; by estimating a lodestone's age and looking at where it points we can see how much that continental plate has drifted seen then. It's a science known as paleomagnetism, btw.

Also the formation of islands and movement of contenants does nothing to negate the world-wide flood evidece of sea life at the tops of moutains.

The evidence had not changed; however, thanks to plate tectonics we can draw a different conclusion. It goes like this:
1. Sealife dies in an area, becomes fossilized
2. Later plate tectonics pushes the land up where the fossils are buried and a mountain is formed with sealife fossils within its peak

It is thus entirely compatible with the notion of deep time and an old earth.

The point above is that given the accurate and trustworthy nature of the Biblical account we EXPECT to find sea fossils EVEN at the tops of mountains.

Wouldn't you expect either an equal distribution of fossils or a distribution by mass/density? Because the evidence shows neither.

Given plate techtonics we do not EXPECT to find that we simply allow that "it might happen in some cases" but it would not have to happen at all for plate techtonics since that science does not argue "all existing mountains had to be under the ocean for plate techtonics to work".

We'd expect that 'mountains that have sealife fossils in their peaks that date to a certain period were submerged land at that period, and vice versa'. Seems like a useful prediction to me, when coupled with other predictions and data to utilize.

Anyway, I have a question for you:

Using YEC theory, predict how ALL fossils should have been distributed by the flood. Is it randomly? By weight, by density, by buoyancy? Are you confident that this pattern has or will be found in nature?