(November 9, 2011 at 3:45 pm)Godschild Wrote: Not true creationist do support Pangea. Genetic disorders were far less then, the gene pool was rather pure.
What's your evidence for that?
![[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1140.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn569%2Fthesummerqueen%2FUntitled2_zpswaosccbr.png)
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 22, 2024, 9:36 am
Thread Rating:
|
Question for young earth creationists
|
 What's your evidence for that?  RE: Question for young earth creationists
November 9, 2011 at 3:52 pm
(This post was last modified: November 9, 2011 at 3:53 pm by Rev. Rye.)
(November 9, 2011 at 3:45 pm)Godschild Wrote: Not true creationist do support Pangea. Genetic disorders were far less then, the gene pool was rather pure. I never thought I'd say this, but, thank you for saying what I was going to say. Some YECs do believe in it, some don't. I based my answer on one who did. It's still a pretty big Voodoo Shark, though.
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
![[Image: harmlesskitchen.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/yxR97P23/harmlesskitchen.png) I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.  RE: Question for young earth creationists
November 9, 2011 at 3:58 pm
(This post was last modified: November 9, 2011 at 3:59 pm by orogenicman.)
A species that consists of a "pure" gene pool is one that has no diversity, is purely, and by definition, inbred, and rife with genetic disorders.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens "I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations". - Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) "In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! " - Dr. Donald Prothero  RE: Question for young earth creationists
November 9, 2011 at 4:02 pm
(This post was last modified: November 9, 2011 at 4:06 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(November 9, 2011 at 3:45 pm)Godschild Wrote: Not true creationist do support Pangea. Genetic disorders were far less then, the gene pool was rather pure. No true thoroughgoing creationist can really support any scientific fact, for any scientific fact if investigated in its complete scientific context would lead inexorably to the complete falsification of all premises that would sets the bible apart from any other work.  (November 9, 2011 at 3:45 pm)Godschild Wrote: Not true creationist do support Pangea. So...what? When did the continents split? How rapidly did this happen? It must have happened exceedingly quickly, and has now slowed right down to barely noticeable speeds, is that right? If so, when and why did that happen?  (November 9, 2011 at 3:45 pm)Godschild Wrote: Not true creationist do support Pangea. Genetic disorders were far less then, the gene pool was rather pure. Didn't think many creationists would, because it would mean accepting that the earth is a lot older than 6 or 10 thousand years. I guess some may. Also the genetic thing, would be nice to see you back that assertion up. What is fact is that when there is inbreeding, there are genetic disorders and it's fatal. The species cannot survive on inbred offspring. The whole "cleaner gene pool, or DNA hadn't been invented yet' is just silly little excuses, a desperate attempt to sustain a faulty belief. Inbreeding is fatal to the species! If we all had sex with our bothers and sisters, our offspring will have all kinds of health problems, many fatal. Heart problems, organ failer and the like. There's a long list of side effects.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity. Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist. You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them. 
So much for keeping the debate in the companion thread. Sigh.
RE: Question for young earth creationists
November 9, 2011 at 4:56 pm
(This post was last modified: November 9, 2011 at 4:57 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
What's the difference, honestly, between a "pure gene pool" and a "master race"?
(It was bound to happen Blaspheme, I won't pursue it, if anyone wants to answer they can answer in the companion thread)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(November 9, 2011 at 4:56 pm)Rhythm Wrote: What's the difference, honestly, between a "pure gene pool" and a "master race"? Every gene pool is an admixing ooze of countless sources of contribution. Gene pool is what it is, there is no meaningful way to apply the description of "pure" or "impure" to its composition. 
The continental breakup came with the flood, scripture tells us that the earth split open and great amounts of water flowed forth, this is what I think happened as far as the continents being formed. This would account for the mountains which, biblically could not have existed or there would have been rain before the flood, because of the uplifting of air caused by mountains. This would explain why rain fell as it does today after the flood and why rain did not fall before the flood. Also with such destructive forces going on it would explain why the evidence for the flood no longer exist.
I do believe that the world could be 50,000 years old, we do have a dating system that is accurate to that age. Even at 50,000 years from a biblical standpoint of creation the gene pool would be pure and there would not have been enough time to completely ruin it. Actually I do believe that between the time Adam brought sin into the world and the flood were some 1700 years, this small amount of time would not have had much effect on a pure gene pool. Of course these are my beliefs and because my profession is not science I can not prove it, I do see it to be a plausible idea.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
