Genetic problems with genesis, the great flood, etc

or rather, fundie advocate. but whatever. evolution is an idea that includes common ancestry -- all life on earth should theoretically share a common ancesrot. why is this different?besides, where the heck did cain's wife come from? apparently, god didn't STOP creating. (eve is still the mother of all mankind, because she is noah's maternal ancestor...) not quite. there is a breeding population of lizards out in arizon and nevada i think. their reproduction is a little more extreme than inbreeding. they're exactly the same genetically. so essentially, it's a breeding population of one individual. in evolutionary thought, that's putting all your eggs in one basket. which is quite risky.also, i'd be suprised if bonobos don't inbreed on a regular basis.

---

אָרַח

a good argument. what about my lesbian clone lizards of the american west? they have LESS THAN two individuals in the breeding population: they're all genetically the same.would you say 2 is bad, but one is ok?

---

אָרַח

book, chapter, verse?

no i don't. remind me.

---

אָרַח

quote:

---

Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years

---

that can't be what i means. i mean, there are inconsistencies in the bible, i know, but this one's a little huge:

quote:

---

Gen 7:6 And Noah [was] six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.

​

Gen 9:29 And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

---

noah lived 350 years after the flood. that's close to three times that limit. after noah, the first person to die before reaching at least 120 is terah, 8 generations after noah (320 years, btw, if you want to do the math). and even then, that's short lived. he's the ONLY person in the book of genesis to die younger than 120 years old.since i happened to have done the math on this one with simple several months ago, i'll tell the conclusion. i takes noah about 100 years to build the ark. that limit of 120 years is 120 years until the flood, not the normal human lifespan.here's the old post if you're interested in the math: http://EvC Forum: Hyper evolution in the bibleThis message has been edited by arachnophilia, 11-14-2005 01:44 AM

---

אָרַח

no, what i'm saying is that there is only one person in genesis who actually falls within that lifespan. that's a little more than god taking it slow -- that's god being wrong.rather, since it takes noah 100 years to build the ark, it's quite reasonable to read that verse as saying mankind as a whole will only live another 120 years. because that's when god is talking about destroying mankind as a whole, isn't it? if you click the link above, you can see the statistical variation. he seems to have kids around the same time. shem is 100 2 years after the flood passes. that's a pretty standard way to read it, but it doesn't hold up. from the time of the proclamation to the flood, it's at least 100 years. and then nobody dies younger than 120 for another 320 years, and then he's the only one. it's just standard to read it that way because we see that number close to our own lifespans -- but look at it in context of the longer lifespans of genesis.it can't mean what you think it means.

---

אָרַח

and the support for this assertion can be found in what book of the bible? chapter and verse?and while we're on it, exactly how many animals did noah take on his ark? (what is a kind?)

---

yet, suprisingly, not in the hebrew one. in modern hebrew, there's an a way to say "the whole world" — — -- kol ha-'olam. it's actually a part of some common expressions.the one time a similar phrase appears in the bible is in job: ‘— — -- tebel kolah.'olam appears to have meant something different then, but when you find references to the entire planet, they use tebel. it's generally translated "world."the flood covers something else: -- 'eretz. land, ground, or in modern usage country. yes, country, as in nation. had they wanted to say "world" they would have used tebel. this has been your hebrew vocabulary lesson for the day.but THAT was not what i asked you. i asked you for the book, chapter, and verse that says that natural law changed at the flood. i have one verse that says people are allowed to eat meat. you got anything else? nor, curiously do we see them in the bible. there's no convincing reason that — should be translated as "giant." the root of the word, nfl, means "fall" as in from heaven, from grace, or in battle. rather, just to further ruin your point...do you not remember the most famous giant in the bible? i'm pretty sure he was around long after the flood.

---

for the last time, inkorrekt, the torah is part of the bible. really. they are not different books. in english, the word for torah is "penteteuch." answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own deceit.

---

so where then is the evidence you claimed?

---