Humans Almost Went Extinct 70,000 Years Ago

““Does it look like that every year or is it more powerful because of the late thaw?”
hyway
9:55:38 AM
4/25/08

Water has only flowed over that spillway 8 times in the past 25 years.

Part of the problem is they didn't drain the lake properly in the fall, because they wanted the extra water to produce more electricity.
last edited: 4/25/08 7:11:05 AM”

“They kind of shot themselves in the foot because the dam is there to control and prevent the upper Hudson River from flooding. Well now the lake has flooded and they can't release any water because the Hudson is close to flood stage and can't handle any more water.”

“ahhh, yet another example of man's inabaility to control his environment. Looks great though”

“The snow melt isn't really much worse than most years, it's just that someone #&%!$ed up.”

“Had Rev. Wright already been FEMA director , none of this would've happened.”

“�Or even worse.... Canadian!�
Reverend Truth V Wicked
7:12:43 AM
4/25/08


I shudder at the very thought!�

Ok ok...It's time to come out of the closet....I'm a Canadian!!!”

“yogisan... I rather like how both the Holmes statement and the Doyle statement can actually be used by both sides of an topic like this.

they are both quotes from the same person... Sr. Arthur Conan Doyle. he wrote the sherlock holmes novels.”

“yogisan.... you know that and I know that but Holmes has a life of his own. My wife is a writer and sometimes her characters say things she would never say. Fictious character yes. But it is still Holmes quote as far as I am concerned. In fact.. if memory serves, they are both both uttered by Holmes.
last edited: 4/26/08 1:27:37 PM”

“The real question is, how inbred will TT become and how close will TT come to extinction.

BTW: RR, I enjoyed your speculations on the flood.”

“Tanks pedxing...

I am through breeding so there is no danger of me messing up the gene pool. But by the same token... I am sure as anything headed for earthly extinction when I finally get my ticket punched.”

“Your theory is just a little off, rev.

The dispersal into small groups wasn't a result of the flood, but what happened immediately afterward. See Genesis, Chapter 11.”

“The dispersal was not a "result" of the flood. That is correct. The dispersal was result of the mixing of languages at the tower of Babel. Like languages grouped together which effectively limited the gene pool resulting in the people groups which inaccurately are referred to as races.

My point, however, was the article suggests the separation into small groups happened before the brush with extinction. That is not consistent with the Biblical narrative. However, the dispersal the article places at "60,000 years" is consistent given the timeline as an unknowable.”

“There was no great flood 4000 years ago. There is no proof that it ever happened and lots of proof that it did not. I respect your right to believe that it did but that doesn't change the fact that it did not. .”

“Most geologists agree that there is amply evidence that major floods did occur but with two major caveats, both of which are unknowables.

Caveat one: There is significant evidence of widespread and catastrophic flooding in many areas of the globe in the same basic geological time frame. Science sets this time frame at various stages, all of which exceed the young earth time frame. But the wide spread flooding is evident.

Caveat 2: Science describes this flooding as a series of localized, although wide spread floods, but not a single global flood.

Since both of these caveats are based on unknowables, as is the young earth time frame also a unknowable, therefore we are back to different world views which may, or may not, be reconciled in the future.”

“Most geologists? Respetfully this is a load of horse hocky. The timelines are very knowable and well documented. You simply refuse to accept the facts because they do not fit your theory. Your theory is what is undocumented and unproven.”

“whatever .... sooner or later we will find out who is right. Until then... no biggie.

However with all do respect.. over my life time the "scientific age" of the earth has changed from several hundred million years to multiple billions of years. For something to change that much in the course of 50 year does not sound knowable and well documented to me.

I also do not understand the invective. If I want to be delusional... what's that you?
last edited: 4/27/08 8:01:14 AM”

“Foreign languages have never stopped drunken sailors. Perhaps that's from where we all would descend. Many would prefer monkeys:)”

“Humans are extinct, only the host for the parasite language remain, along with all the idiotic hobblob that has been translated and transcribed so many times that it's like watching Fox and CNN at the same time.”

“the earth is KNOWN to be 4.55 billion years old and this is KNOWN to be 99% accurate. just because you don't know or understand why this is the case doesn't mean it's not true. also, just because it doesn't agree with your faith-based theory doesn't make it not true.

it's very fair for you to accept a belief that doesn't agree with observed fact as a matter of your faith because that is what faith is all about. it's not fair to try and transform observable facts into your faith-based belief. said another way, why would anyone feel the need to support with observable facts that which they should accept as a matter of faith alone? true faith requires the acceptance of a belief witout proof of any kind. it doesn't require a defense. true faith is KNOWN to not agree with that which we observe because if it DID agree it wouldn't require faith to accept it.
last edited: 4/27/08 8:32:55 AM”

“and so... if I want to be delusional.... what's that to you and how is it unfair to you?”

“i don't think you are delusional at all. as see it you have accepted what you believe as true even though these beliefs lack evidence and/or contradict known facts... you have faith.

let there be no doubt about it. there is nothing that can be won in this discussion because there is no common ground upon which for it to occur. i could no more change your mind with a mountain of facts that deny your faith than you could change my mind and get me to accept your faith in contradiction to my facts.”

“Even in my original post I was not trying to "win" anything. Nor have I tried to sway any ones opinion, at least not by intent. Open dialog is stimulating and enlightening and when I find studies that allow a connection between science and faith I tend to be i8nterested in them. I have enjoyed this, but I think issues of fairness are the wrong wording to use. But anyway... you are correct about three things...

you will not change my position. I will not change yours... and "Nothing is as deceptive as an obvious fact" Sherlock Holmes from the pen of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.”

“Open dialog is stimulating and enlightening

you will not change my position.

haha”

“conversation... the ultimate in safe sex......”

“These surgical gloves do stick to the keyboard.”

“The earth is more likely thought to be 4.55 billion years old, based on the information known to date. Also, keep in mind that you're using 2 decimal places. That means it's being rounded to the nearest 10 million years.”

“what, i suppose you think that leaves open the door for the possibility that the earth is 10,000 years old”

““My point, however, was the article suggests the separation into small groups happened before the brush with extinction...." ramblinrev
8:35:17 AM
4/27/08

I think you seriously misread the article. You keep referrring to the "brush with extinction" as a instant event. My reading of the article is that droughts over a long period of time slowly depleted our population until, at the lowest point, we were down to 2000 people consisting of very small, widely separated, self sufficient communities that had no contact with one another. Then, over time, the droughts ended and resources were able to support greater populations so population levels began to rise again.

This had to have happened over 1000's of years or the separate communities would not have developed DNA strains separate from the other populations”

“geeze louise!

faith
1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions
2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust
3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs

don't you get it? if you can prove something then it then it does not require faith to accept it.

THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN FAITH AND SCIENCE.
last edited: 4/27/08 1:17:36 PM”

“morpher”

“so guilty
.
.
.
soooooo
.
.
.
guilty”

“thanks for that alternate reading hyway... I appreciate it.”

“rev, you really should reread it and you will see what I wrote was not an alternate interpretation but what the people who did teh study were actually saying.”

“"alternate reading" was not intended to be diminutive. It was meant to convey a different perspective than I brought to it. That's all.”