PDA

View Full Version : Population/Technology



Joe King
Oct 29th 2008, 03:38 PM
Doesn't the population of the earth prove a "young" earth? If humans "evolved" millions of years ago, then why are there "only" 6 billion people on earth?

If we evolved so long ago, then why is it only now that we have all these technologies?

σяєяυииєя
Oct 29th 2008, 04:11 PM
then why is it only now that we have all these technologies?

Interesting point Joe,

I`d think It is or could be due to the flood, as I was taught the people living before It came were the ones who made dinos and if they tampered dna to made them then they could have been very smart and with more capability to think and stuff like that.

Go well

Joe King
Oct 29th 2008, 04:42 PM
Interesting point Joe,

I`d think It is or could be due to the flood, as I was taught the people living before It came were the ones who made dinos and if they tampered dna to made them then they could have been very smart and with more capability to think and stuff like that.

Go well

I thought God made dinosaurs:spin:

crawfish
Oct 29th 2008, 11:21 PM
Doesn't the population of the earth prove a "young" earth? If humans "evolved" millions of years ago, then why are there "only" 6 billion people on earth?

Population growth isn't consistent over time. By your reasoning, why aren't there large dinos anymore?


If we evolved so long ago, then why is it only now that we have all these technologies?

It's because Flintstones-style technology died with the dinosaurs. We had to start from scratch. ;)

Joe King
Oct 30th 2008, 03:27 AM
Population growth isn't consistent over time. By your reasoning, why aren't there large dinos anymore?


Because of the flood. Where is the meteor that made the dinosaurs go extinct?? Or evidence of the freezing over of the planet???

Also, why is the population of mankind only recently populating the entire earth?

crawfish
Oct 30th 2008, 05:03 PM
Because of the flood. Where is the meteor that made the dinosaurs go extinct?? Or evidence of the freezing over of the planet???

There's more evidence of either than there is of a global flood. :)


Also, why is the population of mankind only recently populating the entire earth?

The bubonic plague killed half of the people in Europe at the time - about 60 million people. How many smaller plagues struck in other areas, killing off most or all of some societies? How many died in wars and famine? Only recently have we been able to break free from natural causes and increase lifespan.

You can't use simple math to figure what population levels should be. There are far too many things to factor in.

Joe King
Oct 30th 2008, 05:23 PM
There's more evidence of either than there is of a global flood. :)



The bubonic plague killed half of the people in Europe at the time - about 60 million people. How many smaller plagues struck in other areas, killing off most or all of some societies? How many died in wars and famine? Only recently have we been able to break free from natural causes and increase lifespan.

You can't use simple math to figure what population levels should be. There are far too many things to factor in.

Evidence of what?

KATA_LOUKAN
Oct 30th 2008, 08:38 PM
Because of the flood. Where is the meteor that made the dinosaurs go extinct?? Or evidence of the freezing over of the planet???

In Chicxulub, Mexico.

The evidence is present in fossil layers, it can be traced through sediments in the sea, and is intuitive, since a meteor would produce a good deal of debris.


Also, why is the population of mankind only recently populating the entire earth?

Because we didn't have the technology to withstand extremes well.

Human population grown has been anything but constant. Even recently we have had several dips (i.e. black death).


Evidence of what?

The meteor making the dinosaurs go extinct and global ice ages.

σяєяυииєя
Oct 30th 2008, 09:00 PM
The meteor making the dinosaurs go extinct and global ice ages. Only a question my friend,

When in the Bible did it take place?

Go well

KATA_LOUKAN
Oct 30th 2008, 09:11 PM
When in the Bible did it took place?

It didn't.

Reading the Bible as a science book will invariably lead to disappointment.

σяєяυииєя
Oct 30th 2008, 09:43 PM
Are you saying what i think you are?


Go well

KATA_LOUKAN
Oct 31st 2008, 03:11 PM
re you saying what i think you are?

If you mean that the Bible isn't a science textbook, then yes.

David Taylor
Oct 31st 2008, 03:54 PM
Population growth isn't consistent over time. By your reasoning, why aren't there large dinos anymore?


The post-flood climate of the Earth didn't remain conducive to their continuation....otherwise they would still probably be around.

Joe King
Oct 31st 2008, 04:44 PM
The post-flood climate of the Earth didn't remain conducive to their continuation....otherwise they would still probably be around.

Answers in Genesis is a great site for this.

KATA_LOUKAN
Oct 31st 2008, 05:53 PM
Answers in Genesis is a great site for this.

So are you here to discuss things, or has your mind already been made up?

No disrespect, but if it is, then why are you discussing this?

John146
Oct 31st 2008, 06:00 PM
It didn't.

Reading the Bible as a science book will invariably lead to disappointment.Certainly, it's not intended to be just a science book, but it contains some scientific facts written thousands of years ago that weren't "discovered" until hundreds or thousands of years later. I'm going to assume that you are already familiar with what some of those things are, but I will give you that info if you're not familiar with it.

σяєяυииєя
Oct 31st 2008, 06:41 PM
Hey John,

That data would be helpful in my case thanks in advace my friend.

Fareyewell

John146
Oct 31st 2008, 06:55 PM
Hey John,

That data would be helpful in my case thanks in advace my friend.

FareyewellYou can find some examples on this site: http://www.evidenceofgod.com/answers/science.htm

σяєяυииєя
Oct 31st 2008, 07:40 PM
Thanks ,

I will check it out...

Fare ye well


яє - υт
Gσ, αη∂ ѕιη ησ мσяє.

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5459/natureavyty7.jpg

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3020/lifesigyyt9.gif

KATA_LOUKAN
Nov 1st 2008, 10:59 AM
but it contains some scientific facts written thousands of years ago that weren't "discovered" until hundreds or thousands of years later. I'm going to assume that you are already familiar with what some of those things are, but I will give you that info if you're not familiar with it.It contains many inaccuracies, too. Many people try to do this, although I can't see how the "irrefutable scientific proofs" are anything but coincidences. I can't tell you how many times Muslims try to tell me that the Quran accurately predicts scientific phenomenon. It does, to some extent, but for every seemingly correct thing there are scores of bizarre things. When the Bible is viewed as a science book, people forget the meaning behind much of its text and instead focus on irrelevant points.

GitRDunn
Nov 2nd 2008, 10:30 PM
Doesn't the population of the earth prove a "young" earth? If humans "evolved" millions of years ago, then why are there "only" 6 billion people on earth?

If we evolved so long ago, then why is it only now that we have all these technologies?
Well, first off, we weren't around when the Earth first began. I believe you are kind of referencing creationism vs. evolution with you question, and while this isn't the place so I won't go into much detail, theistic evolution (God controlled evolution) claims that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, but that humans didn't start inhabiting it nearly right at first, not until closer to the age of the Earth that Creationism claims to be true is about the time (give or take a few thousand years maybe) theistic evolutionists claim that humans would have started to evolve into humans, not millions of years ago. Also, the Earth's population has grown at different dates in our history. For many thousands of years, people were just barely surviving and hardly any more were being born than died because of early deaths and short life spans, etc. Also, there was something called the Black Death and the Dark Ages which some historians and scientists claim could have set the Earth's progress back a few hundred years because after the large advancements made in Greece and Rome, there was a long "dry season" in technological advancements because people didn't have time to worry about academic studies as much. Also, only recently has the life span truly lengthened for the average person and new advancements in medicine and technology have allowed for greater survival rate with babies too. When you have more babies surviving and people dying off slower due to longer life spans, you're going to start having a population boom, which is what has happened to the Earth in "recent" memory (the last 100 years or so)

Joe King
Nov 3rd 2008, 07:20 PM
Well, first off, we weren't around when the Earth first began. I believe you are kind of referencing creationism vs. evolution with you question, and while this isn't the place so I won't go into much detail, theistic evolution (God controlled evolution) claims that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, but that humans didn't start inhabiting it nearly right at first, not until closer to the age of the Earth that Creationism claims to be true is about the time (give or take a few thousand years maybe) theistic evolutionists claim that humans would have started to evolve into humans, not millions of years ago. Also, the Earth's population has grown at different dates in our history. For many thousands of years, people were just barely surviving and hardly any more were being born than died because of early deaths and short life spans, etc. Also, there was something called the Black Death and the Dark Ages which some historians and scientists claim could have set the Earth's progress back a few hundred years because after the large advancements made in Greece and Rome, there was a long "dry season" in technological advancements because people didn't have time to worry about academic studies as much. Also, only recently has the life span truly lengthened for the average person and new advancements in medicine and technology have allowed for greater survival rate with babies too. When you have more babies surviving and people dying off slower due to longer life spans, you're going to start having a population boom, which is what has happened to the Earth in "recent" memory (the last 100 years or so)

The underlying point that I am making is that all of these "variations" and "hiccups" prove that their theory is false and massively flawed.

GitRDunn
Nov 3rd 2008, 10:30 PM
The underlying point that I am making is that all of these "variations" and "hiccups" prove that their theory is false and massively flawed.
Could you elaborate? I don't understand what you mean by this and how it proves it to be false (evolution, I believe is what you're saying is proved false).

Veretax
Nov 3rd 2008, 11:44 PM
The problem is that God created the earth with the appearance of age. Full grown animals, men and women, not eggs, or babes.

John146
Nov 4th 2008, 02:50 AM
It contains many inaccuracies, too.You are trying to say that God's Word contains inaccuracies? No, it doesn't. Who fed you that lie?

crawfish
Nov 4th 2008, 07:03 PM
You are trying to say that God's Word contains inaccuracies? No, it doesn't. Who fed you that lie?

It contains statements written from a human and not scientific perspective. Pi as 3, for example. You won't get a perfect circle with that equation. We accept that the author wasn't writing an equation; it wasn't an error, just a document that called for an absolute level of accuracy.

However, doesn't that present a problem for a scientific reading of scripture? How do you decide "this part was written for accuracy, and this part wasn't"? By the knowledge that the latter is not accurate? How could you possibly know beforehand that it was not?