? about genetics, evolution, and Genesis

[merlin]

Hi! I'm a newbie here and glad to find such a high-level discussion board. I look forward to learning and exchanging ideas. Here's my question. It seems the current genetic theory about humans is that everyone is descended from one woman-Eve. Doesn't this prove the Biblical theory of creation and throw the theory of evolution out the window? It seems to me that believing that all of evolution devolved to one perfect woman is more mystical than believing in a Creator God. What do you think?

[mike2]

I don't presume to know how God created everything in scientific terms, nor do I understand his timescale or methods, but one thing I do believe is that I am not the product of some highly evolved monkey. I have a soul and I have a creator. That's how I look at it. Let the theologians work out the details because what happened in the remote past, what took place at the beginning isn't that important to me. I'm here and that's all that matters.

[vela]

The Bible deals not with a theory, but a religious belief.

Your question is thought provoking but it is best suited to be discussed in the Philosophy, Ideology and Religion board.

[Igu]

merlin said:

It seems the current genetic theory about humans is that everyone is descended from one woman-Eve. Doesn't this prove the Biblical theory of creation and throw the theory of evolution out the window?

No it doesn't:
-mtdna is transmitted from mother to children, the females transmit it but the males don't, they just bear it.
-therefore, whether you are a male or a female you can trace your direct maternal ancestor up to infinity (Actually it finites with the most primitive form of life that uses mithocondrias).
-First, you can trace your direct maternal ancestor up to the date where your race appeared (say for example mtdna with haplogroup H), further you can trace to the first Homo sapiens : Haplogroup L (or if you prefer L-Eve), then you can go to the commun ancestors of All monkeys (Humans included), further again you get the eve of all mammals.... and so forth.

Creationism is the biggest joke of all minkind's History.. you keep dividing the number of human population by two up to the number two : Adam and Eve! Even a mokey could reach that conclusion.... Fortunately, Humans are "progressive" monkeys.

[Melnorme]

"All of mankind is descended from one woman" != "That woman was the first female human being"

[molika]

Ok let's suppose that we accept the evolutionary assumption that man has existed over a million years.
If we assume 43 years for an average human generation, population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 consecutive generations. If we calculate the expected population by starting with one couple a million years ago, assuming 43 year generation and 2.5 children per family we would have trillions upon trillions of people that should be alive today. We would be standing on enormously high mountains of bones from the trillions of skeletons...scientists have yet to produce these trillions of skeletons predicted by evolutionists.

[SensoUnico]

I have nothing against you, but this is not a religious forum for the converted. There is no way, you or any religious fanatic could make me accept your inventive thinking to prove or disprove anything that required clear thinking or logic. Once upon a time humans lived just like animals: at the mercy of disease, predators, famines, broughts, tsunamis, wars and people were lucky to have one child out of ten survive past the age of 5 years. The human population did not grow exponentially until modern times like 200 years ago. Before that population growth was definitely not Malthusian but slight from decade to decade. And have you ever heard of cremation. The ancients practiced it. In Europe, the human skeletal remains are often removed out of cemeteries, stored en masse in charnel houses and finally disposed of, as in pulverised. It is pointless allowing remains to be in the ground when the great grand children of the deceased are deceased. Cemeteries are often recycled.

[Igu]

molika said:

Ok let's suppose that we accept the evolutionary assumption that man has existed over a million years.
If we assume 43 years for an average human generation, population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 consecutive generations. If we calculate the expected population by starting with one couple a million years ago, . assuming 43 year generation and 2.5 children per family we would have trillions upon trillions of people that should be alive today We would be standing on enormously high mountains of bones from the trillions of skeletons...scientists have yet to produce these trillions of skeletons predicted by evolutionists.

The most ridiculous argument I have ever read/heard.

[merlin]

Thanks for your interesting and thought-provoking replies to my question. Here are my answers:

Mike the Briton:
You are brave to take the stand that you believe in the Creator God. I admire anyone who stands up for what he believes.

Vela:
Thanks for finding the proper place for my question. IMO, the Bible deals with more than belief. For instance, in the book Chronicles of the Kings, many historical battles are described. In cross referencing these battles, imagine my scholarly joy when I discovered that one of the battle depicted in the Bible is described with the same results on a Babylonian stele which exists even now in the British Museum.

Also, the Bible is an ur-text. In Acts 17 vs 21, Luke, a self-professed eyewitness, described Athenians thusly, "Now all the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time in nothing except telling or hearing something new." Isn't it great when an ancient text corroborates what we lovers of ancient history have been taught?

Igu:

Thanks for the interesting facts about mithocondrias. But still, imo, you are avoiding my question. Geneticists say that not just I, or you, or any other human being on earth can trace their ancestry back to some woman; they say we can trace our ancestry back to ONE woman. We agree on that, right? Now, my position is that evolution is not concerned with A individual. If it can be said to work at all, then it is because it happened to masses of life, not just one. Doesn't the fact that only One perfect, complete woman sprang out of chaos to mother the human race goes against the postulates of evolution?

Melnorme:

You wrote ""All of mankind is descended from one woman" != "That woman was the first female human being"

Creationists and geneticists agree about this. Those who hold to the theory of evolution must be scratching their heads. Charles Darwin himself never postulated that ONE woman was the start of us! Indeed, he said the opposite.

Molika:

You've touch on something I've often wondered about. Where are all the dead people's bones? Just looking around my little town, I wonder why the cemeteries take up so little room.

Another question I have about skeletons is where are the ones that show evolution crossing species? Every evolutionist I've ever read or heard speak about this claims that it happens so slowly you don't notice- or they say that evolution is going on in little ways- for instance, one set of people live around malaria causing mosquitoes, so they develop an immunity to these mosquitoes bites. That's not evolution, that's adaptation. Of course species adapt. But, for evolution to have occurred, species had to be crossed. But where are the centaurs existing except in myth?

Also, why don't all of us show some part of evolutionary change.
A few unfortunate people exhibit mistakes of DNA, but where are the winged people, the dog men, insects that bear children instead of lay eggs? Has the evolutionary experiment, if it ever existed, ended?

SensoUnico

You may be right about the disposal of bones, yet is your theory proved by archaeology? It seems to me the vast majority of anciet societies which have been studied went to great and expensive lengths to preserve and honor their dead.

Igu:
You are so brilliant and well-educated I'm surprised you resort to name-calling and ridicule. Do you feel threatened by Molika's theory? Care to elucidate?

[SensoUnico]

merlin, what the hell do you know about archaeology? Being born again does not increase your intelligence or make you a nicer more pleasant person. Only some ancient peoples perserved a very limited number of their dead usually the rich or nobility. It does not really matter as in a short space of time those tombs, graves, monuments for the afterlife were ransacked and the bones discarded like trash by other less reverential generations of their own people. Ancient societies practiced infanticide and forms of population control like abandoning the old, frail and sick in barren places to die painful and lonely deaths. Do not romanticise the past because of your religious bigotry.

[vela]

merlin,

Religion can provide an answer to everything but you have to believe and be satisfied without proof.

This is the classical "if you don't believe as I you're wrong?"

[murphee]

In my opinion, creationism and evolution are not diametrically opposed. God created the stage and the players. Evolution is adaptation of organisms for enhanced survival.
Life is about flux and change, and biological evolution is an expression of this. Species are constantly evolving.
That said, I do take the Biblical approach that God created us and monkeys...not from monkeys. It can't be proven; it is belief.

[geo]

In an environment without gravity, air, temperature changes, environmental forces causing erosion, soil bacteria bio-degrading all kinds of minerals and substances, I guess you could have several millions of human sceletons floating around for several millions of years....


But if our fellow christians seem so eager to put their logic to test, let them explain in just what way will ALL the people ever lived on the face of the earth be ressurected WITH their whole bodies, just as they were when they lived, during the day of judjement.


Sorry fellows, says it in the scriptures

[nockwasright]

molika said:

Ok let's suppose that we accept the evolutionary assumption that man has existed over a million years.
If we assume 43 years for an average human generation, population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 consecutive generations. If we calculate the expected population by starting with one couple a million years ago, assuming 43 year generation and 2.5 children per family we would have trillions upon trillions of people that should be alive today. We would be standing on enormously high mountains of bones from the trillions of skeletons...scientists have yet to produce these trillions of skeletons predicted by evolutionists.

And where are the skeletons of the other animals? Do you believe in carbonium dating?

[geo]

murphee said:

Evolution is adaptation of organisms for enhanced survival.

Excuse me but, what do man needs 'enhanced survival' for? Man was created perfect in the garden of eden and -according to all those who try to 'bridge' genetic science with... the bible(!)- he is in a course towards absolute degeneration ever since. As a matter of fact those people tend to identify the 'absolute global degeneration point' with the actual second coming of the Lord!

Which IF by the way is as close as they say, then 'enhanced survival' must be the one most useless concept man ever came up with!

murphee said:

That said, I do take the Biblical approach that God created us and monkeys...not from monkeys. It can't be proven; it is belief.

You can't prove which was created first, man or monkey, but you take as granted that 'god' actually 'created' something eh?

Man, what do you believers want and get to deal with proofs and logic... you perplex things almost up to insanity point and woe to the one who try to clean the mess...