Post flood evolution?

[Guest skidd2]

I am really looking for help in solving many of the questions I have about the Bible. First question, How is it possible that there are so many different races of people if we all are decendents of Noah? I have estimated that the flood should have occured about 2500 BC, or about 4500 years ago. even if that time was doubled, I doubt that the specific differences in DNA between races could have developed in such a short period of time. To suggest that the flood was local conflicts with other Genesis verses. Ideas?

[Guest LadyC]

first of all, you have to have a basic understanding of DNA... the entire human race shares about... oh i'd have to look it up, but it's like 97 or 99% of dna in common. but then, we share about that much in common with our pet dog, too. it's the tiny percentage of dna that makes us uniquely human, and differentiates us one from another.

second, you need a basic understanding of geneology... every person on the face of the earth can be traced to a common ancestor within 50 generations.

third, you have to factor in adaptability. we adapt to environment over many generations, which accounts for a great deal of inherited traits specific to the geographical region. this can account for skin color, hair and eye color, etc.

an understanding of anthropology helps a bit too. cultural rules of endogamy/exogamy tend to make certain inheritable traits more prominant within certain groups of people.

i'm not sure i understand what you mean about suggesting the flood was local. i always thought it covered the entire earth.

[Guest skidd2]

first of all, you have to have a basic understanding of DNA... the entire human race shares about... oh i'd have to look it up, but it's like 97 or 99% of dna in common. but then, we share about that much in common with our pet dog, too. it's the tiny percentage of dna that makes us uniquely human, and differentiates us one from another.

second, you need a basic understanding of geneology... every person on the face of the earth can be traced to a common ancestor within 50 generations.

third, you have to factor in adaptability. we adapt to environment over many generations, which accounts for a great deal of inherited traits specific to the geographical region. this can account for skin color, hair and eye color, etc.

an understanding of anthropology helps a bit too. cultural rules of endogamy/exogamy tend to make certain inheritable traits more prominant within certain groups of people.

i'm not sure i understand what you mean about suggesting the flood was local. i always thought it covered the entire earth.

I agree about the percentage of DNA and it's unique properties. It is exactly that uniqueness that causes the problem. Your third point, while somewhat accurate, is flawed. Only traits that are present in the parents can be passed to the offspring. As a rule, some traits tend to be dominant over others like hair and eye color. Curly hair is dominant over strait hair. For a new trait to emerge, one or the other of the parents must have had that gene. So where did it come from? It is possible that gene mutations could account for these changes, but such widespread uniformity would take longer than a few thousand years.

Your claim about fifty generations to one common ancestor may be true for certain people, but doesn't explain the different races found to be in existance for thousands of years. Again the date of the flood seems to be a problem.

[other one]

Your claim about fifty generations to one common ancestor may be true for certain people, but doesn't explain the different races found to be in existance for thousands of years. Again the date of the flood seems to be a problem.

Don't forget that Noah's three sons had three wives that we know little about. A lot of diversity could be involved there.

[nebula]

To suggest that the flood was local conflicts with other Genesis verses.

Well, considering that back then no one, as far as we know, had a concept of the Earth as a planet (as we know it now). To say "the entire world" to us means "the entire planet." But to Noah, what do you suppose "the entire world" meant?

[Guest skidd2]

To suggest that the flood was local conflicts with other Genesis verses.

Well, considering that back then no one, as far as we know, had a concept of the Earth as a planet (as we know it now). To say "the entire world" to us means "the entire planet." But to Noah, what do you suppose "the entire world" meant?

By no one, do you mean human or God? Genesis states that all life that needed dry land to survive was destroyed. Gen (6:7 and 6:17)

It didn't matter what Noah thought, but It might have mattered what Moses thought, after all, he wrote Genesis.

[Guest skidd2]

Don't forget that Noah's three sons had three wives that we know little about. A lot of diversity could be involved there.

This is true, but again a problem exists. Given that all humans were gone from the face of the earth, these sons and wives would have had to interbreed to produce children. After only four or five generations, offspring from this group would be homogenous with regard to the common DNA of Noah and his wife passed to his sons.

If the sons separated early and spread out across the land, each son's lineage would be unique, but would also be very narrow after only a few generations because the offspring would have to mate with other offspring.

Assuming that the genetics of Noah, his sons, and their wives were pure and without defect, It is reasonable to predict that after some time, say 200 to 300 years, nearly 100% of all living people would share the same code with only very minor variations.

[Fovezer]

This is a major obstacle for YEC, seeing as geology alone has thoroughly disproved a global flood. There is no possible way to get all the diversity on this planet from a couple of people. Those animals also couldn't get to where they are now and the amount of breeds would be very low. There is also no way that Noah could have possibly got two of all the animals in the world on one boat.

[other one]

This is a major obstacle for YEC, seeing as geology alone has thoroughly disproved a global flood. There is no possible way to get all the diversity on this planet from a couple of people. Those animals also couldn't get to where they are now and the amount of breeds would be very low. There is also no way that Noah could have possibly got two of all the animals in the world on one boat.

Then you're just confirming to me that the father had a hand in the whole thing and another unexplainable miracle is decided upon.

One of a very large number, some I know of personally.

:t:

[Guest LadyC]

I agree about the percentage of DNA and it's unique properties. It is exactly that uniqueness that causes the problem. Your third point, while somewhat accurate, is flawed. Only traits that are present in the parents can be passed to the offspring. As a rule, some traits tend to be dominant over others like hair and eye color. Curly hair is dominant over strait hair. For a new trait to emerge, one or the other of the parents must have had that gene. So where did it come from? It is possible that gene mutations could account for these changes, but such widespread uniformity would take longer than a few thousand years.

actually, each parent carries two of each gene. eye color can be a recessive trait that shows up only once in many generations. i once babysat two little girls of italian decent. both parents had black hair and brown eyes. one child had the blondest hair and the bluest eyes that one might wonder if she was adopted if you hadn't known the parents through the pregnancy. so how did it happen? the mother's great grandmother was the only non-italian in their family tree... irish woman, with blond hair and blue eyes. the little girl was the spitting image of that relative.

the fifty generations tracing to a common ancestor is true not just for certain people, but for all people on the planet. i'm not sure how many people have been studied to come to that conclusion, but it is a widely accepted theory, at the very least, among the experts in the fields of genetics and social anthropology.

fovezer, you're in the minority here. you may be athiest, but you are on a christian site, and Christians believe the Bible to be fact. perhaps you'd do better presenting your arguments as theories rather than facts? ..... noah built a darn huge boat.