Creation model

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:52 pm

OK, so I'm trying to get a grip on the Theory of Creation. (Not easy, even the people who claim it exists won't tell me anything about it.)

The question for this thread is how many species were there on the earth at each phase of history? The only figures I have are those of Woodmorappe (8000 species on the ark) and estimates of the number of species alive today (which I will call ">1 million").

So Bishop Ussher gives as this chronology (which isn't a theory, but is as close as I have come up with yet):

4004 BC Creation

2348 BC Flood

1491 BC Exodus

What I want to do is get some idea of the number of species at each stage:

4004 BC: ?

2348 BC and immediately after: ~8000

Present: > 1 million.

Now, it's important to note that there is no mention of massive speciation anywhere in recorded history. So I am assuming that the million+ species alive today evolved rapidly after 2348. Let's say one full millenium just as a round figure.

Also note that I am only considering the 1 million most conspicuous species. It is a real problem of determining how many there are because there are so many species of insect that we don't know about. They say there may be 30 million total species, mostly beetles.

So one question is, how many species were originally created? Just the 8000 on the ark? Or where there more? How many?

This is what I have so far:

Date Event # species
4004 Creation ?

2350 Flood ~8000

1350 hyper-evo >1 million

present >1 million

DanZ

Jose · Post by **Jose** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:41 pm

YEC wrote:How are we suppose to know how many species there were???

Is there nothing in the bible that could give us some clues? I think that if anyone knows what's there, and could parse it to come up with a rough estimate of numbers, it would be you.

Or was there ever a Bishop Ussher of the Beasts, who worked it out? I don't have a clue, myself--this is beyond my area of expertise.

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 7:54 pm

I believe that most young earthers theorize that there were very few species on the ark.

Yes. About 8000, as proposed by Woodmorappe. But that's not the question.

The question is how many species were there prior to the flood?

In other words, if we are to take creationism seriously, then it needs to explain things about the world that we can observe.

What I keep railing about is that creationism does not explain. There is no "creation theory". The creationists have not developed any sort of alternative to scientific thinking. Creationism is empty.

I am confirmed in this, over and over, as I ask question only to get no answers. It's as if no creationist has thought about even the most basic issue. When we have to turn to Bishop Ussher for a creation chronology, it obviously signals a desperate hollowness.

DanZ

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 7:59 pm

I think that if anyone knows what's there, and could parse it to come up with a rough estimate of numbers, it would be you.

Or at least tell us what the professional creationists say about it.

I mean, how many times do we on the evolution side of the argument say "how are we supposed to know?" when presented with a basic, fundemental question about the general theory? Doesn't happen.

When you open the door to creationism you find an empty room.

DanZ

Titan · Post by **Titan** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 2:02 pm

Yes. About 8000, as proposed by Woodmorappe. But that's not the question.

Some only propose 12 species.

The question is how many species were there prior to the flood?

Such a question really doesn't appear to be important to either side.

In other words, if we are to take creationism seriously, then it needs to explain things about the world that we can observe.

Juliod, how many species of archebacteria were there before the appereance of the chordates? You can't answer that, but it isn't important. Such a questions is unnecessary except to try to make the other side fumble and sound uneducated.

What I keep railing about is that creationism does not explain. There is no "creation theory". The creationists have not developed any sort of alternative to scientific thinking. Creationism is empty.

They don't need to explain everything, in the same manner evolutionists don't need to explain everything. Creationists have developed an alternate theory, I was wondering how many creation books you have read.

I am confirmed in this, over and over, as I ask question only to get no answers. It's as if no creationist has thought about even the most basic issue. When we have to turn to Bishop Ussher for a creation chronology, it obviously signals a desperate hollowness.

I guess I already answered this. It isn't hollow, I have studied it repeatedly, these "holes" aren't really anything to worry about. It is like asking an evolutionists what the third species of annelids was in their chronological chart.

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:51 pm

Juliod, how many species of archebacteria were there before the appereance of the chordates? You can't answer that, but it isn't important. Such a questions is unnecessary except to try to make the other side fumble and sound uneducated.

No. What I was asking about were basic, fundemental questions. What you asked was a specific, detailed question about a sub-sub-field.

Creationism does not exist, even in outline. They don't even have a general chronology.

They don't need to explain everything, in the same manner evolutionists don't need to explain everything.

It's a question of explaining anything. When was the world created? No answer. When was the flood? No answer. When was the tower of Babel built? No answer. All you get from creationists is a quote of the centuries-old estimates of Bishop Ussher, and they won't even commit to that.

It isn't hollow, I have studied it repeatedly, these "holes" aren't really anything to worry about.

Really? So can you give me a good web link that has the overall, basic theory stated clearly? Perhaps a general outline of the chronology?

DanZ

Titan · Post by **Titan** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:53 pm

No. What I was asking about were basic, fundemental questions. What you asked was a specific, detailed question about a sub-sub-field.

Creationism does not exist, even in outline. They don't even have a general chronology.

It isn't a fundamental question because the answers could be so widely varied and still have the same amount of evidence. The Bible's point is not how many species there were but on the soul of mankind. This is the same reason why young earth followers say that there is no mention of dinosaurs. For all creationists hypothesize there could have been millions, on the other hand there could have been very few.

It's a question of explaining anything. When was the world created? No answer. When was the flood? No answer. When was the tower of Babel built? No answer. All you get from creationists is a quote of the centuries-old estimates of Bishop Ussher, and they won't even commit to that.

Just because estimates are old doesn't make them incorrect. Darwin was correct in many cases and his theory is 150 years old. Age doesn't signify accuracy as Galileo was right in many of his hypothesese. I have heard the dates given for the different events before, those aren't questions that are dodged.

Really? So can you give me a good web link that has the overall, basic theory stated clearly? Perhaps a general outline of the chronology?

Look, even evolutionists don't have a clear evolutionary line for their phyla. Arthropoda is still a big mystery. They aren't sure whether Hexapoda and Crustacea are more closely related then other fossils. I did a report on it and I listed 3 different classifications for this phylum. The superclasses/subphyla were all different and that was a report I didn't research for that long.
Juliod, you didn't answer a question I asked...How many creationist books have you read?
The closest website on my mind right now would probably be:
http://www.designeduniverse.com/
and I haven't looked into that one very much.

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:30 pm

It isn't a fundamental question because the answers could be so widely varied and still have the same amount of evidence. The Bible's point is not how many species there were but on the soul of mankind.

No! Questions have (usually) one correct answer. When there is evidence, you can begin the process of finding the correct answer. Creationism, if true, would lead us in the direction of a single, unified answer. And if it were true we would not need to rely on the bible. It would be verifiable in the Real World.

For all creationists hypothesize there could have been millions, on the other hand there could have been very few.

But if you investigate the physical reality of the earth you can come to firm conclusions. Why do creationists not do this?

Just because estimates are old doesn't make them incorrect.

Fine. But my point was that creationists won't commit to Ussher's dates in any case. Do you accept these dates as being reasonably accurate? Would you state it as your belief that the earth was created, say, between 4000 BC and 4008 BC?

I have heard the dates given for the different events before, those aren't questions that are dodged.

Ah, but they are dodged, always. Will you give me the rough dates you accept for the Creation, the Flood, and the Babel story?

even evolutionists don't have a clear evolutionary line for their phyla.

But we do have a general outline and chronology. Again, you are comparing apples to carburators. A theory is an explanation. If creationism is a theory, it must explain. Detail may be lacking, but at the very least there must be a general outline.

Juliod, you didn't answer a question I asked...How many creationist books have you read?

Can you see why that question is irrelevant?

I will look at the link you provided.

DanZ

YEC · Post by **YEC** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 6:51 pm

I don't think there currently is any means of determining how many species there were prior to the flood.

Is that answer not good enough for you?

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:56 pm

Is that answer not good enough for you?

No, of course not! You, in particular, suggest that creationism could be a replacement for science. Creationism must then, at the least, provide alternatives for the main questions.

Why can you not estimate the number of species prior to the ark? In the old days, creation-based science held that there was exactly the same number of species alive today as prior to the flood. Is there some reason this has been dropped?

If all the fossils were laid down at the flood, wouldn't it be trivial to estimate the number of species killed based on the fossil record? Is there some reason this hasn't been done by the people who claim to be creation "scientists"?

DanZ

Titan · Post by **Titan** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:59 pm

No! Questions have (usually) one correct answer. When there is evidence, you can begin the process of finding the correct answer. Creationism, if true, would lead us in the direction of a single, unified answer. And if it were true we would not need to rely on the bible. It would be verifiable in the Real World.

That isn't even true of evolution. They aren't even able to fully classify Arthropods, they aren't sure what the relationships are.

But if you investigate the physical reality of the earth you can come to firm conclusions. Why do creationists not do this?

Are you kidding? I have known geologists and microbiologists who did the very searching you talk about and their conclusions were creationism. Don't make sweeping generalizations, they aren't valid arguments.

Fine. But my point was that creationists won't commit to Ussher's dates in any case. Do you accept these dates as being reasonably accurate? Would you state it as your belief that the earth was created, say, between 4000 BC and 4008 BC?

It is as if you have completely ignored me for the past dozen posts. I don't believe in young earth theories, I am an old earth proponent. I just see obvious holes in your argument and I expose them.

Ah, but they are dodged, always. Will you give me the rough dates you accept for the Creation, the Flood, and the Babel story?

Approximately 4.5 billion years ago, the flood was probably in the realm of 6000 years ago (my estimate) and the Tower of Babel was most likely not far after.

But we do have a general outline and chronology. Again, you are comparing apples to carburators. A theory is an explanation. If creationism is a theory, it must explain. Detail may be lacking, but at the very least there must be a general outline.

They do have a general outline and their dates are probably more precise (in terms of their beliefs) than evolutionists. Evolutionists theories have a +- of millions of years, creationists theories have a +- of less than thousands. So I guess evolutionists need to catch up in that instance.

Can you see why that question is irrelevant?

No because it explains why you haven't heard of any dates. You completely ignore the other side. If you are open-minded you would have researched young earth documents before making accusations.