You need to start over with 8 people right after the Flood. 5 of those people were genetically very close so once again we have issues concerning inbreeding etc. But we can ignore those, because the Bible.
Population doubling; a challenge to the Darwinist
- Thread starter Stripe
- Start date
You need to start over with 8 people right after the Flood. 5 of those people were genetically very close so once again we have issues concerning inbreeding etc. But we can ignore those, because the Bible.
Right. Good point.
I did a rough calculation and got 2E+22 people today, based on 8 people surviving the flood. I may have gotten some details wrong, but this ballpark figure is much more reasonable than the one reached for the "Evolutionist Model". It is only off by a factor of 10^12 from reality!
I just did the same thing, thanks to the magic of the internets. Your # is what I got. If we ignore the Flood, tough to do if you are Stripey, but anyway, if we start with 2 people about 6000 years ago, the # is even worse. 6E+30.
If my math is correct, using Adam and Eve and about 1700 years between Creation and the Flood, there were about 264,000,000 people alive at that time. Where are all those bodies, those fossil humans? If all or most of the fossil land animals we find were the result of the Flood, how come no great store of fossil people? Lets assume with 260 million people, some would have lived in cities or large towns, why do we not find large concentrations of such fossils?
Stripey, care to comment with some substantive response? Is my math wrong? If so, please explain. If the math is correct, how do you explain the discrepancy between your claim and simple math?
Whadya think folks? A reply of substance and thoughtfulness from the Stripeman or a simple "silly Darwinists"?
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
The "math" is flawed because the starting assumption, "Today's population doubling period is thought to be 60 years", is not a universal constant.
There are many easy to find articles on the internet that thoroughly debunk the "Morris Equation" but I'm sure you wouldn't be interested.
It's funny that for creationists isotope decay rates and the speed of light were faster (or slower, depending on their assumption needs) in the past but the population growth rate in the past was the same as today. :kookoo:
Done, though I'm sure you will without doubt disagree.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
"Darwinists hate reading", is also quite popular. :chuckle:
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Epoisses
New member
Did you factor in war and disease that wiped people out by the truck loads! Why does everyone view the past with 21st century goggles?
:chuckle:
Darwinists hate links.
I got 3.34x1027.
Yes, it's not reasonable either. Not by a long shot.
I get 2.54x1030.
What process are you using?
Because you're trying to argue about anything other than OP?
How would I know? :idunno:
You pulled numbers from somewhere without showing any working.
:AMR:
What discrepancy? My claim is simple math. Feel free to discuss this rationally. :up:
Silly Darwinist.
Nobody claimed that it was.
Math isn't flawed because of a false assumption; it is flawed because someone makes a calculating error, say they multiplied when they should have divided.
That you failed to pick up on an actual mistake I made shows that you're not paying attention to the numbers; all you care about is the assault on your precious religion.
There is one easy-to-find OP in this thread that thoroughly describes what I'm talking about, but I'm sure you wouldn't be interested.
The doubling period is an average over the range of years set by the spreadsheet.
Today's average of 60 years is untenable for either the YEC or the Darwinist side. The creationist result is (almost literally) a million times better than the Darwinists', but there still needs to be some justification for increasing the doubling period. Our camp needs to go up to about 180 years.
That's the point, your boy Stripe cited doubling every 60 years based on post Industrialization and the advent of better sanitation, food supplies, etc.
I didn't change my position that today's doubling period is about 60 years, you blithering moron.
Is it the sole purpose of Darwinist's to spout endless nonsense?
Yes, Stripe, today's doubling rate is about every 60 years, but you based your "the Bible supports today's population level therefore god" argument on doubling every 60 years. Or did you use that # for a different reason?
Your response here is dishonest, but then you are Stripe and apparently feel comfortable lying when it fits your Biblical model.
I used that rate because it's the only one that is possibly verifiable, you raving retard.
6days
New member
In all likelihood, more than 1 billion people went into eternity at the time of the flood. "Then he used the water to destroy the ancient world with a mighty flood. And by the same word, the present heavens and earth have been stored up for fire. They are being kept for the day of judgment, when ungodly people will be destroyed." 2Pet.3:6,7
Creation..... 2 people. Double every 60 years
60 ... 4 people
120 ... 8
180 ... 16
240 ... 32
300 ... 64
360 ... 128
420 ... 256
480 ... 500 (Rounding)
540 ... 1000
600 ... 2000
660 ... 4000
720 ... 8000
780 ... 16,000
840 ... 32,000
900 ... 64,000
960 ... 128,000
1020 ... 256,000
1080 ... 512,000
1140 ... 1,024,000
1200 ... 2,048,000
1260 ... 4,100,000 (rounding)
1320 ... 8,200,000
1380 ... 16,400,000
1420 ... 32,800,000
1480 ... 65,600,000
1520 ... 132,000,000
1580 ... 264,000,000
1640 ... 528,000,000
1700 ... 1,000,000,000+
I deliberately didn't, to show how ridiculous Stripes whole idea is.
Stripe, the doubling rate you use gives absurd results for both the scientific world view and the creationist world view. Your assumption, that the current doubling rate has been true historically for thousands of years is clearly flawed- not the math.
It is really OK to admit that you are wrong.
6days
New member
The worlds current population is consistent with the Biblical account. There would have been almost zero disease with first humans. The human genome is crumbling. Genetic disorders and disease continually increase. We can see that human life spans dramatically decrease after the global flood.
Ohh, Stripey, does your Mommy know you call people names? Not very Christian of you. But I won't tell her, don't want her to be upset with her little boy.
It is pretty much a debate tactic of 10 year olds.
6days
New member
That is pretty much a immature debate tactic of 10 year olds.