[_ Old Earth _] Rapid evolution of human races after the Great Flood

[jwu]

That's just an artistic expression.

The actual fossils that it's more or less based on are these:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc ... inids2.jpg

They all look human.

The one at the upper left corner is a chimp skull, by the way. It was added for comparison.

*chuckles*

 

[John]

i can place chimp skulls, human skulls and ape skulls in a line, but it means nothing.
arrangeing animals on paper or whatever does not prove anything.

 

[jwu]

Well, you asked for what that drawing is/may be based upon, and i delivered the answer.

The progression indeed doesn't mean much yet...but isn't it weird that the required fossils for such a progression actually exist? Without evolution, that'd be a strange coincidence, wouldn't it?

However, since you mistook a chimp skull for a human one, i guess comparative anatomy is lost on you.

 

[John]

Well, you asked for what that drawing is/may be based upon, and i delivered the answer.

The progression indeed doesn't mean much yet...but isn't it weird that the required fossils for such a progression actually exist? Without evolution, that'd be a strange coincidence, wouldn't it?

However, since you mistook a chimp skull for a human one, i guess comparative anatomy is lost on you.

no i seen your post on the chimp before i posted my last post.

no its not a surprise that those skulls exist, its just a mix of apes,monkeys and humans, prove me wrong.

 

[jwu]

no its not a surprise that those skulls exist, its just a mix of apes,monkeys and humans, prove me wrong.

That kind of contradicts your previous statement that they all look human. But ok: Which exactly are ape and which are human then?

 

[John]

To me they all look human, but its supposed to show the tranision of apes to humans, i can't tell you which is which. but please tell me, how does lining up these skulls prove we transcended from apes ?

 

[jwu]

but please tell me, how does lining up these skulls prove we transcended from apes ?

It doesn't "prove" it, i don't claim they do. But it the existence of these skulls needs to be explained.

An evolutionary progression nicely does this job, and it does so rigorously. It predicts where what type of fossil should be found in the future.

Can creationism predict where we should find specific fossils?

 

[John]

You find a bunch of mangled skulls in strata and they are in order...wait stop...what makes you think they are in order ?

If i find Skull A in strata layer A and Skull B in Strata Layer B Does this mean that B came from A, or is that the assumption ?

Thats why i say that evolution is based on faulty assumptions, you assume the flood did not happen, you assume the earth is millions of years old, you assume those layers were layed there over vast amounts of time, You assume these skulls are from our ancestors because they look different and were found in assumed sequence ( A to B see above), by going against what the bible says one can assume many things to fill the gaps that the bible would leave if it were removed.

 

[jwu]

You find a bunch of mangled skulls in strata and they are in order...wait stop...what makes you think they are in order ?

If i find Skull A in strata layer A and Skull B in Strata Layer B Does this mean that B came from A, or is that the assumption ?

Why would a deluge leave them in an order which is predicted by the ToE? Had it left e.g. the last but one in the series not in the uppermost strata but in a stratum associated to the beginning of the series, then this would deal a serious blow to the common descent of humans and other apes. How do you explain this weird coincidence, if the ToE were false?


By the way, it were Christian geologists who originally tried to find evidence for the noachian flood who first came to the conclusion that it isn't supported by the evidence.

It isn't assumed that the noachian flood didn't happen, but it's a conclusion based on the evidence.

 

[John]

So the more "ape" like skulls were found in lower strata ? and the more human ones were found nearly topside is this correct ?

 

[jwu]

Yep, they fit into the age ranges as shown by this graph:

 

[John]

Did it occur to you that humans (epically ones 900 +/- years old) were smarter then apes ?

 

[jwu]

Humans are smarter than apes, yes...so what?

Let's assume you live on a plain, like e.g. Iowa:

It has been raining for days now, and the water is rising. Currently it reaches your knees. What do you do?

• Move to the upper stories of your house[/*:m:73810]
• Get to the 100 ft high hill that exists a few miles from you[/*:m:73810]
• Get to the mountain range that is 50 miles away[/*:m:73810]

Your choice?

 

[John]

Then humans (being smarter then your garden variety animal) would of course be the last to die.

i would assume due to the amount of rain that the best choice is high ground, not mountains because no one assumes that that storm is gonna reach epic levels, if the storm get bad enough i would head for mountains as would the people in the great flood. and if all hell broke loose i would cling to items that float, as the people in the flood would have done, hence they would be on the top most strata.

Now not all humans are smart, and the ones in the bible were pretty stupid to not believe in god, and according to the bible it never rained before the flood, so alot of them probably got buried with the apes and other animals, we don;t know the population before the flood so finding any human remains in the same strata as other animals would be rare if the population were low.

 

[jwu]

Then humans (being smarter then your garden variety animal) would of course be the last to die.

Wouldn't that be decided by where one lives? Humans and animals on flat plains with no hills nearby would be quite helpless and drown quickly, while humans and animals that live in a mountain area have a pretty good chance to survive for quite a while.

i would assume due to the amount of rain that the best choice is high ground, not mountains because no one assumes that that storm is gonna reach epic levels,

Yep.

if the storm get bad enough i would head for mountains as would the people in the great flood.

How would you get there? You're currently on a hill, surrounded by 20ft deep water. The mountains are dozens of miles away. I guess swimming is not an option...

and if all hell broke loose i would cling to items that float, as the people in the flood would have done, hence they would be on the top most strata.

For how long would those people have to hold out that way to be found only on the top most strata? Should a whole bunch of them not have long since drowned, as it happened in so many other floods?

E.g. the 1887 Yellow River flood. 900,000-2,000,000 people dead.
The 1931 Yellow River flood. 1,000,000-2,000,000 people dead.
The Bhola Cyclone: 300,000–500,000 people dead.

Clinging to wood didn't seem to help these people, did it?

 

[John]

Wouldn't that be decided by where one lives? Humans and animals on flat plains with no hills nearby would be quite helpless and drown quickly, while humans and animals that live in a mountain area have a pretty good chance to survive for quite a while.

yes that is true.

How would you get there? You're currently on a hill, surrounded by 20ft deep water. The mountains are dozens of miles away. I guess swimming is not an option...

yes that would be a problem, but i would have been gone way before it reached 20 feet. everybody acts different.

For how long would those people have to hold out that way to be found only on the top most strata? Should a whole bunch of them not have long since drowned, as it happened in so many other floods?

yes, but it is not known how long it took to create those layers, personally i believe it happened fast wen "the fountains of the deep " broke open and the 39 days after it was all settling, any human caught out after the first day would be on the top because the sorting of strata and animals continued within would have ceased.

E.g. the 1887 Yellow River flood. 900,000-2,000,000 people dead.
The 1931 Yellow River flood. 1,000,000-2,000,000 people dead.
The Bhola Cyclone: 300,000–500,000 people dead.

Clinging to wood didn't seem to help these people, did it?

but the majority of these humans were not buried in sediment, they just drowned, plus these floods fail in proportion to a global flood.

a puddle to a lake...

its weird to think that i drive to work on my human ancestors :

 

[jwu]

[quote:e3ffb]How would you get there? You're currently on a hill, surrounded by 20ft deep water. The mountains are dozens of miles away. I guess swimming is not an option...

yes that would be a problem, but i would have been gone way before it reached 20 feet. everybody acts different.
[/quote:e3ffb]
Possibly, but by the time when you decided to leave the hill, wouldn't the water already be too deep to get to the mountains? Is it even a realistic choice to make? Trying to get to the mountain seems like suicide to me - i bet most people would take their chances on the hill and hope that the water doesn't rise that high. After all, if the water is 6 ft deep or 20ft matters little for the plan to get to a mountain. Walking falls flat either way ;)

[quote:e3ffb]For how long would those people have to hold out that way to be found only on the top most strata? Should a whole bunch of them not have long since drowned, as it happened in so many other floods?

yes, but it is not known how long it took to create those layers, personally i believe it happened fast wen "the fountains of the deep " broke open and the 39 days after it was all settling, any human caught out after the first day would be on the top because the sorting of strata and animals continued within would have ceased.[/quote:e3ffb]So until which day would humans have to make it that way?

but the majority of these humans were not buried in sediment, they just drowned, plus these floods fail in proportion to a global flood.

It doesn't matter if they were buried in sediments for the point, does it?`They were killed despite of their intelligence, that's the relevant point. Hence evidently floods trump human escape plans. We should find human remains all over the geologic column if the flood had happened.

 

[John]

Possibly, but by the time when you decided to leave the hill, wouldn't the water already be too deep to get to the mountains? Is it even a realistic choice to make? Trying to get to the mountain seems like suicide to me - i bet most people would take their chances on the hill and hope that the water doesn't rise that high. After all, if the water is 6 ft deep or 20ft matters little for the plan to get to a mountain. Walking falls flat either way ;)

True enough.

So until which day would humans have to make it that way?

i guess nobody knows.

It doesn't matter if they were buried in sediments for the point, does it?`They were killed despite of their intelligence, that's the relevant point. Hence evidently floods trump human escape plans. We should find human remains all over the geologic column if the flood had happened.

Not necessarily, population is still in play, more people = more fossils, less people..well i will let you figure that out. animals were all over the earth, humans no so much.

 

[jwu]

i guess nobody knows.

Wouldn't that be a nice topic for a research paper?

Not necessarily, population is still in play, more people = more fossils, less people..well i will let you figure that out. animals were all over the earth, humans no so much.

How would the population size affect the distribution of fossils?

 

[John]

Wouldn't that be a nice topic for a research paper?

Sure.

How would the population size affect the distribution of fossils?

It would not effect the distribution of the fossils, just the amount of said fossils and therefore decrease the chances of finding them, also due to reasons given earlier in the thread.