I never considered the hovind youtubes as bait.
S
If man evolved?
by tornapart 427 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
still thinking
It's just that the more I read the more questions there are. About everything!....tornapart
I know! Isn't life wonderful!
Deciding WHAT to read next is one of the most difficult decisions and the most exciting.
-
tornapart
Considering I was told at the start to 'go away and read a book and stop asking questions'... it's funny how I go away and come back and find this thread has taken on a life of it's own.... LOL
Fascinating stuff though...
I've been thinking a bot more about my original questions and haven't come across anything that has convinced me yet. Even the radiometric dating doesn't seem to be fool proof.
A few statistics.... they say man was about a population of 1 million about 10, 000 years ago. There are about 4 generations (for arguments sake) in 100 years. So to get from 2 people doubling each generation (going by the bacteria illustration), that would be roughly 20 generations. At that very slow rate it would take only 500 years to reach a million. We are talking about 500,000 years, a thousand times longer!
Another thing... all those millions, possibly billions of ancient bones/skeletons...... where are they?
-
-
Heaven
Another thing... all those millions, possibly billions of ancient bones/skeletons...... where are they?
Some civilizations/religions use/used cremation.
-
jgnat
Bones degrade over time. The degradation is slower than for soft tissue, but it does happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_process_of_decomposition#Bone_degradation
Specific conditions must exist for bones to be preserved through fossilization.
-
Comatose
Lost- it's about how to provide for that many people. There was no way to feed and sustain more than one million. If you watch the documentary Food Inc it makes the point if I remember right that the only way the world supports the population it has currently is to do mining of natural gas to make nitrogen fertilizer. Without it the earth would not have 7 billion people on it.
-
-
cofty
tornapart - I still don't see the connection between your question about historical population statistics and evolution.
To be honest I'm not sure I understand the question. The human population grew only very slowly for most of its history because of disease, war and starvation. It seems obvious, am I missing something?
Can you explain please?
By the way radioetric dating is 100% solid. Don't be fooled by James Browns' pseudoscience.
-
tornapart
Sorry Cofty, I'll try to explain. I'm not very good at this sort of thing which I why I ask questions instead of stating anything.
I don't believe in a young earth and I believe in animal evolution to a certain extent but believe God's hand was in it at certain stages.
When it comes to man I can believe that he's been on earth longer than what the bible suggests but not as long as evolution suggests. One of the problems I have accepting it is the incredibly slow growth needed to support it. Mathematically it just doesn't make sense to me. It's as if man's growth was stagnant for 490,000 years and then took off in the last few thousand years.
And for radiometric dating to be 100% accurate wouldn't you have to be sure that the atmosphere now is the same as it was when the object you are looking at first appeared/died?