It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by MrXYZ
You haven't falsified any of my statements. You've only posted what other geologists with a bias have to say about it.
Sure, geologists that agree with evolution will agree with each other and disagree on most anything contrary.
On the other hand, geologists that agree with creation will agree with each other and disagree on most anything contrary.
Even those like William Ryan and Walter Pitman, who don't necessarily agree with a biblical flood, were criticized for their black sea deluge theory. It seems as though any theory put forth that correlates to the biblical flood in any manner whatsoever is quickly criticized and regarded as false DESPITE the evidence from any archaeological findings.
A February 2009 article reported that the flooding might have been "quite mild".
According to a study by Giosan et al., the level in the Black Sea before the marine reconnection was 30 m below present sea level, rather than the 80 m or lower of the catastrophe theories. If the flood occurred at all, the sea level increase and the flooded area during the reconnection were significantly smaller than previously proposed. It also occurred earlier than initially surmised, ca. 7,400 BCE rather than the originally proposed 5,600 BCE.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
I mean, from what Ive seen , the (evolutionary)scientists seem to be working under the assumption that life "must have evolved" so their answers to questions are on the lines of "dunno, but evolutiondidit".
No, they're working from the conclusion based on 150+ years of scientific research that shows that evolution has occurred, it occurring now, and will continue to occur.
Originally posted by Matthew Dark
reply to post by tinfoilman
You have an interesting point of view, but you're entirely wrong about one of your crucial points.
Evolution does happen in leaps and bounds, in response to environmental factors, this is true.
But it doesn't happen over the course of years.
It happens over the course of generations.
Your "10-20 years" for multi-cellular animals and your "about a month" for bacteria (clearly stating that you have no clue as to how bacteria function) are so wrong that it nullifies your entire theory.
You can have your opinion, which is fine...whatever.
But when you're interjecting your opinion as fact, and being wrong about it...well, then there's an issue.
But for extra credit: Does anyone know why you have to get a flu shot EVERY YEAR! I'll give you one good guess!
Irony: complaining about an ad hominem attack after telling someone to 'stop being a stupid atheist'.
...you do realize that your solution actually makes things worse for the case of Noah, right?
Oh, it's just genetics. Let's take the typical storybook version first. Noah takes 2 of every species. That means every single species is narrowed down to 2 members. 2. Incredibly small gene pool right there. Now, that's the sort of thing we would have evidence of. We already have evidence of a massive narrowing the gene pool of the cheetah about 10,000 years ago to the point where two cheetahs from different populations are more related than most human cousins. There should be evidence of this gene pool bottle neck in every species.
Now, narrow it down to 2 members of the same genus...so that multiple species all have the same great^x grandparents...and you get an even smaller bottleneck, which should be even more evident.
The further up the classification chain you take it, the smaller and smaller the genetic bottleneck, the more evidence there should be of the bottleneck.
Sir, I believe that sound is that of a tinfoil rear end getting given to you by hand.
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
But we do see a bottleneck in the HUMAN population....correct?
In fact, it's a bottleneck that SUPPORTS the story of Noah's Ark....