Doubters of Evolution

[Gonzo]

I pose to you a hypothetical situation.

There are several assumptions which are known as facts that must be taken into account first though.

1) Genetic mutations exist (or at the very least accept that there are large amounts of varying genetics throughout a population). Examples would be varying eye color, hair color, and a variety of others regarding almost every aspect of an organism.

2) These mutations are coded for within DNA and can be passed down to offspring.

3) When mutations are selected for they have can "stacking up" effect to some degree, as we would see with dog breeding. (for example the breeding of bloodhounds with extremely sensitive sense of scent).


Now for my example lets say we take individuals from a human population and select for traits, much like animal breeding. We select for individuals with an extended tail bone/spine and continue to select for them throughout the generations. Based upon the above assumptions you will eventually have a group of individuals with an appendage much like a tail. Now if we select for smaller body size and body hair as well, we have something that looks very much like a monkey, but it wouldn't be and it would most likely still be able to breed with the regular human population. However, if you select for certain traits regarding sexual reproduction, specifically the acidity of the vagina and size of it as well (perhaps even shape). And you have the males in the population selected for characteristics that correspond, it will eventually make sexual reproduction with the normal human population impossible (Which under one definition of the species concept, will make them separate species). There are also some other wild genetic traits that exist in the human population that could be selected for, like webbed digits or blue skin even.


If this example does not convince you I ask that you point out the reasons so that I may use our existing knowledge of genetics and heritability to propose another hypothetical example that may persuade you. I also ask that you lay the groundwork on what constitutes a separate species in your opinion so that my example may incorporate it. Also, if you disagree with my assumptions I can help illustrate them as fact.

I realize my example uses artificial selection rather than natural selection, but I can substitute artificial pressures for environmental ones in the next situation I provide.

[Intrepidman]

Catastrophes also typically leave evidence behind.

A global flood, for example, had it occurred would have left lots of evidence behind. All the evidence we have indicates a global flood did not occur.

There have been lots of catastrophes including local floods that we can find evidence for. No global flood, though.

There have even been catastrophes that have had a global impact, like the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. This left what I believe is called the "irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.


However, the main point would be that we can observe non-catastrophic geological processes operating in the past. We can typically tell when either short term catastrophes (local floods, fault slippages, etc.) have occurred as well as longer term and slower techtonically induced movements.

IMHO, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.

First you say that there is no evidence for world-wide catastrophe A, then you say that there is proof for world-wide catastrophe B.

I would say that the

"irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.

is evidence for a world-wide flood.

[JoeyKnothead]

I would say that the

"irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.

is evidence for a world-wide flood.

I see two problems off the top of my head:

1- Not enough water for a world wide flood.
2- Iridium layer is in 65 million year old strata.
3- Getting two (or more in some cases) of every "breathing" animal onto a vessel built with the technology of the time.

Both of these seem to conflict with the flood tales.

[Goat]

I would say that the

"irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.

is evidence for a world-wide flood.

I see two problems off the top of my head:

1- Not enough water for a world wide flood.
2- Iridium layer is in 65 million year old strata.
3- Getting two (or more in some cases) of every "breathing" animal onto a vessel built with the technology of the time.

Both of these seem to conflict with the flood tales.

And, the layer does not have evidence of water associated with it. That's a big one.
No evidence of water means it is not associated with a flood.

In this case, the absence of evidence FOR is definitely evidence against.

[Wyvern]

Catastrophes also typically leave evidence behind.

A global flood, for example, had it occurred would have left lots of evidence behind. All the evidence we have indicates a global flood did not occur.

There have been lots of catastrophes including local floods that we can find evidence for. No global flood, though.

There have even been catastrophes that have had a global impact, like the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. This left what I believe is called the "irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.


However, the main point would be that we can observe non-catastrophic geological processes operating in the past. We can typically tell when either short term catastrophes (local floods, fault slippages, etc.) have occurred as well as longer term and slower techtonically induced movements.

IMHO, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.

First you say that there is no evidence for world-wide catastrophe A, then you say that there is proof for world-wide catastrophe B.

You did not read this correctly, it says if there was a global catastrophy it would leave behind evidence and then gave an example of the K-T impact which left a worldwide layer of iridium.

I would say that the

"irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.

is evidence for a world-wide flood.

And you would be wrong. The reason iridium is considered a good indicator of a meteor impact is because it is incredibly rare on earth, but nowhere near so in meteors. See the biggest proof that there was not a global flood is the HISTORIC record, in that there is one and it is not broken even though in early history supposedly all but seven people were killed by god.

[Gonzo]

And you would be wrong. The reason iridium is considered a good indicator of a meteor impact is because it is incredibly rare on earth, but nowhere near so in meteors. See the biggest proof that there was not a global flood is the HISTORIC record, in that there is one and it is not broken even though in early history supposedly all but seven people were killed by god.

Don't forget the fact that these people and animals were imperfect and now had to mate through incest due to a tremendous bottleneck.

If you'll indulge me to start again.

According to the YEC view (as I understand it), Adam & Eve were created directly by God in an ideal environment. This would mean that if they had not 'sinned' and been ejected from Eden then they could procreate forever in 'Eden'.

Brothers, sisters, mothers, cousins, the familial relationship would not matter because the genes would remain 'perfect'.

After the fall they were no longer in 'Eden'. For a bit the genes remained close to 'perfect' (that's why Cain could marry his sister), but as time progressed cosmic rays bombarded the genes of humankind and introduced errors. This might not take long at all.

All it would take is a ray to the sperm, or ovum DNA of a single individual to potentially add a new error to the population (assuming that error was not so profound it killed the child)

At some point these errors accumulated until such point that familial relationships produced children with profound problems.

So the fall introduced gamma radiation? If this "didn't take long at all" why don't we see large changes in the populations today? And then we wonder how these traits exist in the population today, and why geographically isolated human populations are different if we started with two individuals. Could it be that traits that increased reproduction became more prominent due to inheritance and those that hindered reproduction (in the specific environment) were selected against by their very nature?

Also If you would please respond to post 78 on page 8 I would greatly appreciate it.

[Intrepidman]

I would say that the

"irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.

is evidence for a world-wide flood.

I see two problems off the top of my head:

1- Not enough water for a world wide flood.
2- Iridium layer is in 65 million year old strata.
3- Getting two (or more in some cases) of every "breathing" animal onto a vessel built with the technology of the time.

Both of these seem to conflict with the flood tales.

And, the layer does not have evidence of water associated with it. That's a big one.
No evidence of water means it is not associated with a flood.

In this case, the absence of evidence FOR is definitely evidence against.

I would like to see proof of this.

[Intrepidman]

Catastrophes also typically leave evidence behind.

A global flood, for example, had it occurred would have left lots of evidence behind. All the evidence we have indicates a global flood did not occur.

There have been lots of catastrophes including local floods that we can find evidence for. No global flood, though.

There have even been catastrophes that have had a global impact, like the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. This left what I believe is called the "irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.


However, the main point would be that we can observe non-catastrophic geological processes operating in the past. We can typically tell when either short term catastrophes (local floods, fault slippages, etc.) have occurred as well as longer term and slower techtonically induced movements.

IMHO, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.

First you say that there is no evidence for world-wide catastrophe A, then you say that there is proof for world-wide catastrophe B.

You did not read this correctly, it says if there was a global catastrophy it would leave behind evidence and then gave an example of the K-T impact which left a worldwide layer of iridium.

I am reading you correctly. The part we agree on is that there was a global catastrophe. The part we disagree on is what that catastrophe was. All we know for sure is that there appears to be an increased level of iridium in the strata of rock. This layer of iridium appears to be global. How it got there is anyone's guess.

[JoeyKnothead]

Catastrophes also typically leave evidence behind.

A global flood, for example, had it occurred would have left lots of evidence behind. All the evidence we have indicates a global flood did not occur.

There have been lots of catastrophes including local floods that we can find evidence for. No global flood, though.

There have even been catastrophes that have had a global impact, like the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. This left what I believe is called the "irridium layer" which can be found all across the world. It forms what is called the K-T boundary in the geological record.


However, the main point would be that we can observe non-catastrophic geological processes operating in the past. We can typically tell when either short term catastrophes (local floods, fault slippages, etc.) have occurred as well as longer term and slower techtonically induced movements.

IMHO, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.

First you say that there is no evidence for world-wide catastrophe A, then you say that there is proof for world-wide catastrophe B.

You did not read this correctly, it says if there was a global catastrophy it would leave behind evidence and then gave an example of the K-T impact which left a worldwide layer of iridium.

I am reading you correctly. The part we agree on is that there was a global catastrophe. The part we disagree on is what that catastrophe was. All we know for sure is that there appears to be an increased level of iridium in the strata of rock. This layer of iridium appears to be global. How it got there is anyone's guess.

^my underlining.

You said previously the iridium layer was evidence of a worldwide flood, but now you say its anyone's guess?

The evidence for the iridium layer is as stated - iridium is rare on earth, but abundant in asteroids. This leads to a logically, reasonably derived conclusion of an asteroid impact.

How does the iridium lead to evidence of a worldwide flood?

[Wyvern]

You did not read this correctly, it says if there was a global catastrophy it would leave behind evidence and then gave an example of the K-T impact which left a worldwide layer of iridium.

I am reading you correctly. The part we agree on is that there was a global catastrophe. The part we disagree on is what that catastrophe was. All we know for sure is that there appears to be an increased level of iridium in the strata of rock. This layer of iridium appears to be global. How it got there is anyone's guess.

The concentration of iridium on the earth's crust is approximately 0.5 ppb. The concentration of iridium in the K-T layer is approximately 445 ppb. This leaves us with only a few possibilities for this anomaly, it came from within the earth where there is a greater concentration of iridium or it came from an extraterrestrial source i.e. a comet or meteor. The eruption theory lost out rather quickly since within the layer the concentrations of other elements that should have been there either weren't there or they were also out of proportion. The extraterrestrial theory also had a few different possibilities, either a meteor/comet or a nova. The nova idea also lost out rather quickly because of the same reasons the terrestrial theory lost out. Which just leaves us with it being caused by a meteor or comet and with the discovery of the Chixhulub crater that pretty much sealed the case for it being a meteor. So see what you call a guess came about from a long line of evidence.

Another interesting thing is that the Chixhulub meteor may well have not been the cause of the K-T extermination event it may have merely been the final nails in the coffin for many species. In the same general period of time the Shivan meteor impacted in India which probably caused the Deccan traps to form. The Deccan traps are a massive volcanic feature that at its formation covered nearly 1.5 million kilometers, a size which makes the yellowstone supervolcano look like a baby.

[Grumpy]

Intrepidman

I would like to see proof of this.

All the information we have been posting is in the public domain, it's not any kind of secret. If you are truly interested, it is really, really easy to find.

At the same time, scientist Luis Walter Alvarez put forth his hypothesis that a large extraterrestrial body had struck Earth; and in 1981, oblivious to Penfield's discovery, University of Arizona grad student Alan R Hildebrand and faculty adviser William V Boynton published a draft Earth-impact theory and were seeking a candidate crater.[9] Their evidence included greenish-brown clay with surplus iridium containing shocked quartz grains and small weathered glass beads that looked to be tektites.[10] Thick, jumbled deposits of coarse rock fragments were also present, thought to have been scoured from one place and deposited elsewhere by a kilometers-high tsunami likely resulting from an Earth impact.[11] Such deposits occur in many locations but seem concentrated in the Caribbean basin at the K–T boundary.[11] So when Haitian professor Florentine Morás discovered what he thought to be evidence of an ancient volcano on Haiti, Hildebrand suggested it could be a telltale feature of a nearby impact.[12] Tests on samples retrieved from the K–T boundary revealed more tektite glass, formed only in the heat of asteroid impacts and high-yield nuclear detonations.[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_Crater

All it takes is a willingness to open your eyes to the facts.

Grumpy