Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,824 Year: 4,081/9,624 Month: 952/974 Week: 279/286 Day: 0/40 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What’s YEC explanation for the emergence of races?
derwood
Member (Idle past 1903 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 16 of 47 (28422)
01-04-2003 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by peter borger
12-26-2002 7:39 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
dear all,
Ever heard of MPG, NRM and GUToB?
No - should anyone have?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by peter borger, posted 12-26-2002 7:39 PM peter borger has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 17 of 47 (28649)
01-08-2003 5:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Aryeh Shavit
12-25-2002 9:39 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Aryeh Shavit:
I wonder how the YEC scientists explain the existence of human races. Specifically:
1) How did the descendants of Adam and Eve become so racially different during just a few thousands of years?
2) Why do the different races live in different geographical zones and how did they manage to arrive there. For example how did the Australian aborigines arrive to Australia?
Thanks in advance,
Aryeh.

It's even less time ... and I've asked this too ... since all the
races we see had to come from Noah's descendents which acording to
YEC was about 4500 years ago.
Plus, since we know that different races existed at the time
of Jesus, that cuts us down to an emergence time of less than
2500 years.
We also know that different races existed prior to this,
and that according to KJV Egyptians existed only a few
hundred years after the flood ... indicating a racial separation
time of a mere few hundred years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Aryeh Shavit, posted 12-25-2002 9:39 AM Aryeh Shavit has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by RedVento, posted 01-08-2003 10:01 AM Peter has not replied
 Message 35 by ddmcneill, posted 01-22-2003 1:50 PM Peter has replied

  
RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 47 (28680)
01-08-2003 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Peter
01-08-2003 5:46 AM


This is just something I got while watching my favorite station (Discovery Channel).
Apparantly based on the lack of any significant differences in human DNA they surmised that at one point in history the human was near extinction. Apparantly there should be more variation in DNA. Using the knowledge of mitochondrial DNA and that it has a nearly set mutation rate they have been able to back track and give this near extinction time at sometime 70-80k years ago. It is surmised that the human race was cut down to roughly 10k members and that is what accounts for the lack of variation. They attribute this to a "super volcano."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Peter, posted 01-08-2003 5:46 AM Peter has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by peter borger, posted 01-08-2003 8:11 PM RedVento has replied
 Message 34 by ddmcneill, posted 01-22-2003 1:43 PM RedVento has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7692 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 19 of 47 (28714)
01-08-2003 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by RedVento
01-08-2003 10:01 AM


Dear Vento,
V: This is just something I got while watching my favorite station (Discovery Channel).
Apparantly based on the lack of any significant differences in human DNA they surmised that at one point in history the human was near extinction. Apparantly there should be more variation in DNA. Using the knowledge of mitochondrial DNA and that it has a nearly set mutation rate they have been able to back track and give this near extinction time at sometime 70-80k years ago. It is surmised that the human race was cut down to roughly 10k members and that is what accounts for the lack of variation. They attribute this to a "super volcano."
PB: More ad hoc evo-blahblah-explanations on 'mind control'. Contemporary biology has demonstrated a very recent origin of homo sapiens-->Creation. See also my comments on the ZFY region (the region for which they have to postulate this nonsense).
Evolutionism = science fiction.
Best wishes
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by RedVento, posted 01-08-2003 10:01 AM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Peter, posted 01-13-2003 2:28 AM peter borger has replied
 Message 22 by RedVento, posted 01-14-2003 2:22 PM peter borger has replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 20 of 47 (28970)
01-13-2003 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by peter borger
01-08-2003 8:11 PM


The question was about how YEC scientists explain the
emergence of different human 'races' given the
time-frame available in the Bible.
In this context your response is meaningless.
The point, I feel, that was being made was that for the
best evidence+interpretation in contempory science
suggests that we have 70-80,000 years to develop
such differences.
The relatively small variation amongst humans compared to other
species is more likely caused by the greater prevalance of
inter-breeding in human populations ... what other organisms
do you know that can count ancestors across the whole of europe,
and in some cases asia and africa too?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by peter borger, posted 01-08-2003 8:11 PM peter borger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by peter borger, posted 01-13-2003 8:17 PM Peter has replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7692 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 21 of 47 (29026)
01-13-2003 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Peter
01-13-2003 2:28 AM


Dear Peter,
P: The relatively small variation amongst humans compared to other
species is more likely caused by the greater prevalance of
inter-breeding in human populations ... what other organisms
do you know that can count ancestors across the whole of europe,
and in some cases asia and africa too?
PB: I already discussed the ZFY region with Page. I've demonstrated several times what the problems are with this region, why this region is NOT explained by NDT. I was under the impression that you had read it, since you responded to my claim of NRM in this region in another thread. You are free to believe this kind of evo-nonsense (stories for the gullible), but remember it is NOT backed up by science. On the contrary. What do you think 'evo-scientists' had to invent this time now they found out about the invariant ZFY region. A mega vulcano? Get real. Think for yourself!
And about your other organisms.... there are plenty.
Best wishes,
Peter
[This message has been edited by peter borger, 01-13-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Peter, posted 01-13-2003 2:28 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Peter, posted 01-15-2003 1:52 AM peter borger has not replied

  
RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 47 (29116)
01-14-2003 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by peter borger
01-08-2003 8:11 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear Vento,
V: This is just something I got while watching my favorite station (Discovery Channel).
Apparantly based on the lack of any significant differences in human DNA they surmised that at one point in history the human was near extinction. Apparantly there should be more variation in DNA. Using the knowledge of mitochondrial DNA and that it has a nearly set mutation rate they have been able to back track and give this near extinction time at sometime 70-80k years ago. It is surmised that the human race was cut down to roughly 10k members and that is what accounts for the lack of variation. They attribute this to a "super volcano."
PB: More ad hoc evo-blahblah-explanations on 'mind control'. Contemporary biology has demonstrated a very recent origin of homo sapiens-->Creation. See also my comments on the ZFY region (the region for which they have to postulate this nonsense).
Evolutionism = science fiction.
Best wishes
Peter

I just thought the program was interesting. It tied in the notion of a "super-volcano" and what its eruption might do to life on Earth. Apparantly there is a "super-volcano" forming under Yellowstone National Park.
Here are some Yellowstone supervolcano links:
http://www.solcomhouse.com/yellowstone.htm
http://armageddononline.tripod.com/volcano.htm
NASA Lowers Sights to Predict Volcano's Eruption | Space
[This message has been edited by RedVento, 01-14-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by peter borger, posted 01-08-2003 8:11 PM peter borger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by peter borger, posted 01-14-2003 7:19 PM RedVento has replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7692 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 23 of 47 (29131)
01-14-2003 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by RedVento
01-14-2003 2:22 PM


Dear Red Vento:
RV: I just thought the program was interesting. It tied in the notion of a "super-volcano" and what its eruption might do to life on Earth. Apparantly there is a "super-volcano" forming under Yellowstone National Park.
PB: And therefore humans went through a bottleneck 70 ky BP? What happened to logic?
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by RedVento, posted 01-14-2003 2:22 PM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by RedVento, posted 01-15-2003 11:43 AM peter borger has replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1506 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 24 of 47 (29166)
01-15-2003 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by peter borger
01-13-2003 8:17 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear Peter,
P: The relatively small variation amongst humans compared to other
species is more likely caused by the greater prevalance of
inter-breeding in human populations ... what other organisms
do you know that can count ancestors across the whole of europe,
and in some cases asia and africa too?
PB: I already discussed the ZFY region with Page. I've demonstrated several times what the problems are with this region, why this region is NOT explained by NDT. I was under the impression that you had read it, since you responded to my claim of NRM in this region in another thread. You are free to believe this kind of evo-nonsense (stories for the gullible), but remember it is NOT backed up by science. On the contrary. What do you think 'evo-scientists' had to invent this time now they found out about the invariant ZFY region. A mega vulcano? Get real. Think for yourself!
And about your other organisms.... there are plenty.

Which ones? And is that ancestral from an evolutionary viewpoint
or from family trees?
I also take it from your response that you have not considered
the impact of human behaviours (where they differ from
other animals) on the genome ... your post was dismissive,
as often you are, in a way that suggests that you cannot think
beyond your own narrow viewpoint.
[This message has been edited by Peter, 01-15-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by peter borger, posted 01-13-2003 8:17 PM peter borger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by derwood, posted 01-21-2003 11:14 AM Peter has not replied

  
RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 47 (29188)
01-15-2003 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by peter borger
01-14-2003 7:19 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear Red Vento:
RV: I just thought the program was interesting. It tied in the notion of a "super-volcano" and what its eruption might do to life on Earth. Apparantly there is a "super-volcano" forming under Yellowstone National Park.
PB: And therefore humans went through a bottleneck 70 ky BP? What happened to logic?
Best wishes,
Peter

The logic is this:
The last super-volcano eruption was 70-80k years ago. Based on the a realtively fixed rate of mutation in mitochondria they can trace back the relativly few number of deviations in human mitochondria to that same time frame. The theory I believe is that the effects of a super-volcano eruption 70-80k years ago killed off a large number of early humans which is why there are such a low number of genetic differences in us today. The supervolcano eruption is the cause of the bottleneck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by peter borger, posted 01-14-2003 7:19 PM peter borger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by peter borger, posted 01-15-2003 8:04 PM RedVento has replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7692 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 26 of 47 (29222)
01-15-2003 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by RedVento
01-15-2003 11:43 AM


dear vento,
The logic is this:
RV: The last super-volcano eruption was 70-80k years ago.
PB: reference please
RV: Based on the a realtively fixed rate of mutation in mitochondria
PB: You mean the NONRANDOM mutations in mtDNA? Listen, RV, I have demonstrated recently that the mutations in mtDNA are non-random mutations. The molecular clock is very, very doubtful at the least (according to the mtDNA data human and chimp have a common ancestor 150 ky BP. Funny, isn't). I think Dr Page is making overhours at the moment to solve this little evolutonary inconvenience.
RV: they can trace back the relativly few number of deviations in human mitochondria to that same time frame.
PB: No they CANNOT since they CANNOT exclude non-random mutations. The whole story is based upon randomness of mutations. And since non-random mutaions have been scientifically demonstrated the whole story is invalid.
PB: The theory I believe is that the effects of a super-volcano eruption 70-80k years ago killed off a large number of early humans which is why there are such a low number of genetic differences in us today. The supervolcano eruption is the cause of the bottleneck.
PB: The ZFY region mutates also NON-RANDOMLY so all the conclusions from this region are completely invalid. You, indeed, have faith in science fiction.
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by RedVento, posted 01-15-2003 11:43 AM RedVento has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by RedVento, posted 01-16-2003 11:08 AM peter borger has replied

  
RedVento
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 47 (29261)
01-16-2003 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by peter borger
01-15-2003 8:04 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
dear vento,
The logic is this:
RV: The last super-volcano eruption was 70-80k years ago.
PB: reference please
RV: Based on the a realtively fixed rate of mutation in mitochondria
PB: You mean the NONRANDOM mutations in mtDNA? Listen, RV, I have demonstrated recently that the mutations in mtDNA are non-random mutations. The molecular clock is very, very doubtful at the least (according to the mtDNA data human and chimp have a common ancestor 150 ky BP. Funny, isn't). I think Dr Page is making overhours at the moment to solve this little evolutonary inconvenience.
RV: they can trace back the relativly few number of deviations in human mitochondria to that same time frame.
PB: No they CANNOT since they CANNOT exclude non-random mutations. The whole story is based upon randomness of mutations. And since non-random mutaions have been scientifically demonstrated the whole story is invalid.
RV: The theory I believe is that the effects of a super-volcano eruption 70-80k years ago killed off a large number of early humans which is why there are such a low number of genetic differences in us today. The supervolcano eruption is the cause of the bottleneck.
PB: The ZFY region mutates also NON-RANDOMLY so all the conclusions from this region are completely invalid. You, indeed, have faith in science fiction.
Best wishes,
Peter

Every one of the links I posted referenced the last eruption, and all I said was that it was interesting. And I do have faith in people who are presented as doctors in relevant fields, rather than in a book of dubious origins and those trying to prove its validity. But that's just my opinion.
Best Wishes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by peter borger, posted 01-15-2003 8:04 PM peter borger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by peter borger, posted 01-16-2003 7:23 PM RedVento has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7692 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 28 of 47 (29311)
01-16-2003 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by RedVento
01-16-2003 11:08 AM


dear Vento,
V: Every one of the links I posted referenced the last eruption, and all I said was that it was interesting.
PB: It is interesting, but it can be demonstrated based on the most recent scientific insights that the conclusions are wrong. The conclusions were based on faulty assumptions.
V: And I do have faith in people who are presented as doctors in relevant fields,
PB: Than you should have faith in me.
V: rather than in a book of dubious origins and those trying to prove its validity. But that's just my opinion.
PB: Thanks for your opinion.
best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by RedVento, posted 01-16-2003 11:08 AM RedVento has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1903 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 29 of 47 (29768)
01-21-2003 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Peter
01-15-2003 1:52 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
... your post was dismissive,
as often you are, in a way that suggests that you cannot think
beyond your own narrow viewpoint.
Indeed.
Notice how Borger prattles on with his dismissives regarding explanations - not only for things he claims have none in a NDT framework, but for his many erors.
And, of course, the repeated accolades he implicitly heaps upon himself.
One of several reasons I stopped taking Borger seriously quite a while ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Peter, posted 01-15-2003 1:52 AM Peter has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by peter borger, posted 01-21-2003 6:54 PM derwood has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7692 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 30 of 47 (29802)
01-21-2003 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by derwood
01-21-2003 11:14 AM


dear Dr Page,
That human and chimp are the same genus according to your brilliant analysis, was it based upon chromosome 4 or chromosome 17?
Best wishes,
Peter
"Page knows what I mean"
[This message has been edited by peter borger, 01-21-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by derwood, posted 01-21-2003 11:14 AM derwood has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Peter, posted 01-22-2003 2:45 AM peter borger has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024