Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Basic Evolutionist Time Sandwich
7/23/06 | self

Posted on 07/23/2006 9:36:42 AM PDT by tomzz

Assuming macroevolutionary scenarios were possible (they aren't), the question arises, how much time would you actually need for them? The basic answer to that question is known as the Haldane Dilemma, after the famous mathematician and population geneticist J.B.S. Haldane who published his work in the mid 1950s. The basic answer is that you would need trillions and quadrillions of years, and not just the tens of millions commonly supposed. Walter Remine puts a simplified version of the idea thusly:

Imagine a population of 100,000 apes or “proto-humans” ten million years ago which are all genetically alike other than for two with a “beneficial mutation”. Imagine also that this population has the human or proto-human generation cycle time of roughly 20 years.

Imagine that the beneficial mutation in question is so good, that all 99,998 other die out immediately (from jealousy), and that the pair with the beneficial mutation has 100,000 kids and thus replenishes the herd.

Imagine that this process goes on like that for ten million years, which is more than anybody claims is involved in “human evolution”. The max number of such “beneficial mutations” which could thus be substituted into the herd would be ten million divided by twenty, or 500,000 point mutations which, Remine notes, is about 1/100 of one percent of the human genome, and a miniscule fraction of the 2 to 3 percent that separates us from chimpanzees, or the half of that which separates us from neanderthals.

That basically says that even given a rate of evolutionary development which is fabulously beyond anything which is possible in the real world, starting from apes, in ten million years the best you could possibly hope for would be an ape with a slightly shorter tail.

But nobody ever accused evolutionists of being rational. Surely, they will argue, the problem might be resolved by having many mutations being passed through the herd simultaneously.

Most of the answer involves the fact that the vast bulk of all mutations are harmful or fatal. ANY creature which starts mutating willy nilly will perish.


So much for the amount of time evolutionists NEED (i.e. so much for the slice of wonderbread on the bottom of the basic evolutionist time sandwich. What about the slice on the top of the sandwich, i.e. how much time do they actually HAVE?

Consider the case of dinosaurs, which we are told died out 70 million years ago. Last summer, scientists trying to get a tyrannosaur leg bone out of a remote area by helicopter, broke the bone into two pieces, and this is what they found inside the bone:

This is the Reuters/MSNBC version of the story

That meat clearly is not 70 million years old; I've seen week-old roadkill which looked worse.

Vine DeLoria, the well-known Native American author and past presidentg of the National Council of Amnerican Indians informs us that Indian oral traditions speak of Indian ancestors having to deal with dinosaurs on a regular basis, and that Indians view the 70 million year thing as a sort of a whiteman's fairytale.

In fact, we appear to have one state named after a dinosaur, Mississippi being a variation of the Ojibway name "Mishipishu", which means "water panther", or stegosaur. DeLoria notes that Indian traditions describe Mishipishu as having red fur, a sawblade back, and a "great spiked tail" which he used as a weapon.

In fact you find pictures (petroglyphs) of Mishipishu around rivers and lakes and Lewis and Clark noted that their Indian guides were in mortal terror of these since they originally signified as much as "One of these LIVES here, be careful".

The pictograph at Agawa Rock at Lake Ontario shows the sawblade back fairly clearly:

and the close-eyed will note that stegosaurs did not have horns; nonetheless such glyphs survive only because Indians have always gone back and touched them up every couple of decades, and the horns were added very much later after the creature itself had perished from the Earth.

You add the questions of other dinosaur petroglyphs and Ica stones and what not into the mix and it seems fairly obvious that something is massively wrong with the common perception that dinosaurs died out tens of millions of years ago.

That is basically what I call the evolutionist time sandwich. They need trillions or quadrillions of years, and all they have is a few thousand.


TOPICS: Religion; Science
KEYWORDS: crevolist; dilemma; dinosaurs; enoughalready; gettingold; haldane; idiocy; medved; pavlovian; splifford; spliffordisgay; stupidity; stupidvanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 361-370 next last
To: GoLightly

"Is mead best sipped or chugged?"




Based on my own taste-tests, all the mead I've tasted should be flushed.


241 posted on 07/24/2006 6:24:03 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
You list who was doing the praying, not the entity of which they were requesting the supernatural intervention.


"Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found."

Just how does that result come from the trial procedures ?
... "to deliver the prayers, using the patients' first names and the first initials of their last names."

Supposedly no one knew who they were praying for.
242 posted on 07/24/2006 7:19:53 AM PDT by RS ("I took the drugs because I liked them and I found excuses to take them, so I'm not weaseling.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
"God answers all prayers, but sometimes His answer is no."

That's the key isn't it ?

Wouldn't you like to find out if there is a more "acceptable" method of prayer that results in a higher successful completion ?

This seems to be even scripturally sound, as Christ gave instructions on HOW to pray, so it seems like there should be a method which gives a better chance of obtaining the desired results.
243 posted on 07/24/2006 7:36:09 AM PDT by RS ("I took the drugs because I liked them and I found excuses to take them, so I'm not weaseling.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
Most see DNA/RNA as a total disproof of evolution:

If you don't stop that you'll go blind as a bat.

244 posted on 07/24/2006 7:40:04 AM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
Of course there have also been any number of "proofs" of evolution including Piltdown Man (after 40 years proved to be a fraud)

Why do you think Piltdown Man is a fraud?

245 posted on 07/24/2006 8:30:49 AM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs
Check Nova and PBS Below:

For decades, a fossil skull discovered in Piltdown, England, was hailed as the missing link between apes and humans. Entire careers were built on its authenticity. Then in 1953, the awful truth came out: "Piltdown Man" was a fake! But who done it? In "The Boldest Hoax," NOVA gets to the bottom of the greatest scientific hoodwinking of all time.

The search for clues takes NOVA to the archives of Britain's august Natural History Museum in London, where intriguing documents shed new light on the notorious case. Offering theories on the deception are two prominent paleontologists at the museum, Chris Stringer and Andy Currant. Also sleuthing for NOVA are archeologist Miles Russell of Britain's Bournemouth University, historian Richard Milner of the American Museum of Natural History in New York, and Giles Oakley, son of Kenneth Oakley, the scientist who blew the whistle on the hoax in 1953.

It all started in the early 1900s, when a laborer digging near the village of Piltdown in southern England reportedly found a strange piece of skull that he passed on to Charles Dawson, a local amateur archeologist. Dawson obtained more fossils from the site and, believing they were the remains of a very ancient human, approached Sir Arthur Smith Woodward, Keeper of Geology at the Natural History Museum. In December 1912, the two jointly presented the reconstructed skull to the public as humankind's earliest ancestor.

"Piltdown Man was a really big deal in 1912, because it was a time when very little was known of human fossil remains," says historian Richard Milner. "It was perceived to be the missing link, the fossil that connected humans with apes." Notably, Piltdown Man was even more spectacular than the celebrated human fossils already discovered on the European continent, such as Neanderthal Man in Germany.

More remains turned up in Piltdown through 1915, the year before Dawson's death. These included a second partial skull and a strange bone artifact resembling a cricket bat—a fishy find that looked suspiciously like a hoax but was accepted by Woodward as an ancient implement. Forty years later, new scientific tests showed that Piltdown Man was a forgery, concocted in part from what was probably an orangutan's jaw. Suspicion immediately fell on Dawson, but there were other candidates.

Some scholars believe that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author of the Sherlock Holmes stories, was the mastermind. Conan Doyle had a motive: desire for revenge against the British scientific establishment for ridiculing his spiritualist research. He also had the opportunity, since he lived just a few miles from Piltdown and frequently played golf nearby. Others think that Woodward was the instigator or at least Dawson's collaborator, since the fossils were faked with far greater skill than any amateur presumably possessed.

In recent years, another suspect has emerged: Martin Hinton, a staff member at the Natural History Museum who had the motive, means, opportunity, and personality to perpetrate an expert scientific fraud. Plus he left several suggestive hints. On the other hand, the evidence against Hinton can be read in more than one way, and the real swindler may be the obvious one: the man who had the most to gain from convincing the world that Piltdown Man was the fossil to end all fossils—Charles Dawson.

246 posted on 07/24/2006 8:51:11 AM PDT by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

But all that material is the work of people who are using the Theory of Evolution as a framework. They've concluded that Piltdown is a fraud because it doesn't fit the TOE. What's your reason?


247 posted on 07/24/2006 8:56:29 AM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs
Simple. The skull is 1000 years old. The jaw is that of an Orangutan treated with potassium chlorate. What is it you want?

What is truly shocking is not just that people in the early 20th century believed this but people now do with all the tools and resources available to properly date things.

Regards. If you are skeptical yet, just Google Piltdown man or better yet Piltdown Man Hoax. You can read for days.

248 posted on 07/24/2006 9:03:31 AM PDT by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: RS
Wouldn't you like to find out if there is a more "acceptable" method of prayer that results in a higher successful completion ?

This seems to be even scripturally sound, as Christ gave instructions on HOW to pray, so it seems like there should be a method which gives a better chance of obtaining the desired results.

Praying "better" isn't gonna change God's will. Thy will be done. Ya know? Most people think they're more capable of doing their boss's job than their boss, cuz they can't see the big picture.

249 posted on 07/24/2006 9:32:58 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

No, DNA is proof of Creationism.

In fact, once the faithfullness of DNA was discovered, Evolution should have come to a screeching halt.

THAT is Science.

Evolution is a false religious belief, based on bad science and requires giant leaps of faith to believe it.


250 posted on 07/24/2006 9:38:10 AM PDT by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
Simple. The skull is 1000 years old. The jaw is that of an Orangutan treated with potassium chlorate. What is it you want?

Creationists right here on FR insist that archaeologists and paleontologists don't know what they're doing, their methods are faulty, their measurements meaningless. So how do you know the skull is 1000 years old? The number of times creationists right here at FR have rejected scientific methods of dating fossils is countless. Is there some other method they have?

What is truly shocking is not just that people in the early 20th century believed this but people now do with all the tools and resources available to properly date things.

I don't get it. Here you appear to accept "all the tools and resources available to properly date things," and yet, when those tools and resources give results that support the TOE, somehow there's a problem.

Regards. If you are skeptical yet, just Google Piltdown man or better yet Piltdown Man Hoax. You can read for days.

I'm skeptical that you have a reason for rejecting Piltdown Man that doesn't involve the same tools and resources that support the TOE, as I stated above.

251 posted on 07/24/2006 9:49:55 AM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: tomzz

So, what do evolutionists come up with to answer this one? OK I know the first thing they say is that this and we are stupid. Then they ask if we are scientists and if now how dare we think about such things. Have any entered into the actual point yet?


252 posted on 07/24/2006 9:54:20 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (More and more churches are nada scriptura.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Based on my own taste-tests, all the mead I've tasted should be flushed.

Sounds like the first taste didn't cure you & you went back for more.

"MineralMan, why are you beatin your head against that wall?"

"Because it feels so good when I stop."

253 posted on 07/24/2006 9:54:37 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Why does he hypothetically eliminate the rest of the herd? There is no logic to it. Any number of the other 999,998 could be the evolutionary spark - take that quantum leap so to speak - that speeds up the whole process.

It gives the benefit to evolution. In reality the mutation would probably be lost in the herd making evolution even less likely. Even when evolution is given this advantage it still comes out a loser.

254 posted on 07/24/2006 9:59:37 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (More and more churches are nada scriptura.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: DungeonMaster
Have any entered into the actual point yet?

Can you tell me what the point is of using cave paintings (anatomically incorrect ones at that) as evidence for recent living dinosaurs -- even after admitting that the paintings have been touched up every few decades?

255 posted on 07/24/2006 10:00:27 AM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: js1138

I'll take that as a no.


256 posted on 07/24/2006 10:03:31 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (More and more churches are nada scriptura.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: DungeonMaster

Can you tell me the point is of lying about the so-called dino meat? What is the point of lying about this stuff, when the odds of being caught are 100 percent?


257 posted on 07/24/2006 10:08:43 AM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: js1138

I don't know what lie you're talking about. I am interested hearing the evolution side of the first part of the post, the 100,000 ape problem.


258 posted on 07/24/2006 10:15:36 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (More and more churches are nada scriptura.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: DungeonMaster
Is this what you are referring to:

Walter Remine puts a simplified version of the idea thusly:

Imagine a population of 100,000 apes or “proto-humans” ten million years ago which are all genetically alike other than for two with a “beneficial mutation”. Imagine also that this population has the human or proto-human generation cycle time of roughly 20 years.

Imagine that the beneficial mutation in question is so good, that all 99,998 other die out immediately (from jealousy), and that the pair with the beneficial mutation has 100,000 kids and thus replenishes the herd.

259 posted on 07/24/2006 10:18:47 AM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
I am familiar with the material. It has been debunked multiple times on these threads. Why do you guys do that? You get an argument and/or source crushed, so you don't respond and instead post it on the next thread, like the result will be any difference.

It doesn't take into consideration subtleties such as the difference between desirable traits and survival traits.

It was someone with an agenda and a dabble-level understanding of biology who started at the end point and then drew his lines in reverse, then plotted the points.

DNA is currently telling the whole story of Evolution, but it takes experts in that fields to understand and interpret the results.


Willful ignorance of the worst kind.
260 posted on 07/24/2006 10:18:49 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (A Conservative will die for individual freedom. A Liberal will kill you for the good of society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 361-370 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson