Speculation, Glenn, speculation.
>>No progressive mutations have appeared in fruitflies to date.>>
Fact, Glenn, Fact.
>>So are you suggesting that there should be no interpretation? We all
just
> sit and stare at the fossils with no one saying a word? What do you
want?
> Someone needs to raise the obvious question "What do the fossils mean?"<<
Interpretation can abound until the cows come home, as far as I'm
concerned. The problem arises when its treated as fact and spoken as if
its ex-cathedra from the Pope. If people want to believe a frog turned
into a prince by the magic kiss of time, fine.
>
By the way, thanks much for the math. I'll use it in the appropriate
sermon
Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not rely on your own insight.. Pr. 3:5
Ron Chitwood
chitw@flash.net
----------
> From: Glenn Morton <grmorton@waymark.net>
> To: Ron Chitwood <chitw@flash.net>; evolution@calvin.edu; Bill Hamilton
<hamilton@predator.cs.gmr.com>
> Subject: Re: New Flood data
> Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998 8:34 PM
>
> At 04:39 PM 2/19/98 -0600, Ron Chitwood wrote:
> >>>> However, what we usually hear from YEC's is
> >repetitions of arguments that have been recycled ad infinitum. And that
> >grates after a while.<<<
> >
> >Agreed, and as a YEC myself, they are constantly repeated because
> >documented macro-evolutionist answers are not forthcoming. Many erudite
> >opinions are expressed, but no documentation. 83 x 52=4316 generations
of fruitflies compared to 5 in humans. How long
ago is 4316 generations in human terms? Oh, about 77,000 years. And if
you
will look at what anthropologists say, Homo sapiens has been on the earth
for 120,000 years, some say 200,000. We have not had a lot of time to
evolve fruitflies even by evolutionary standards. . 83 x 52=4316
generations of fruitflies compared to 5 in humans. How long
ago is 4316 generations in human terms? Oh, about 77,000 years. And if
you
will look at what anthropologists say, Homo sapiens has been on the earth
for 120,000 years, some say 200,000. We have not had a lot of time to
evolve fruitflies even by evolutionary standards. >
> Well lets put this into perspective. Fruit flies have a generation time
egg
> to egg of 2 weeks (here is your documentation ~Encyclopaedia Britannica
Vol
> IV ,p. 338 ; Encyclopaedia Britannica Vol 1 ,p. 300; Tracy I. Storer
> Robert L. Unsinger James W. Nybakken, Elements of Zoology, (St. Louis:
> McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1968), p. 224)
>
> Now lets compare the evolution of fruitflys with that of humans from
> chimpanzees. Since 1915 there have been
>
> 1998-1915=83 years
>
> 83 x 52=4316 generations of fruitflies compared to 5 in humans. How long
> ago is 4316 generations in human terms? Oh, about 77,000 years. And if
you
> will look at what anthropologists say, Homo sapiens has been on the earth
> for 120,000 years, some say 200,000. We have not had a lot of time to
> evolve fruitflies even by evolutionary standards.
>
> Man separated from the chimps 5-7 million years ago. We wil use 5
million
> with a generation time of 15 years (which is probably too long chimps
give
> birth at 10 years [documentation: ~Encyclopaedia Britannica Vol 10 ,p.
913
> Ashley Montague, Man: His First Two Million Years, (New York: Dell
> Publishing Co., 1969)].
>
> With these assumptions there have been 333,333 generations between us and
> the chimps. If we put that into fruitfly (drosophila) terms with a 2
week
> generation, the minor change we see between man and chimp would take
12820
> years to take place. Thus, evolution would be unexpected to produce much
> change in flys in the 80 years or so.
>
> The problem with many creationist arguments is that no one actually
performs
> calcuations like this to see what would be expected. Young-earthers seem
to
> be content with qualitative terms like "there have been a whole lot of
> generations of flys in 80+ years" rather than actually figuring out how
many.
>
>
>
>
> Fossil layer interpretation abounds here, as it does on most
> >chatrooms, but that is all it is, and predicated on the huge timespans
> >required by macro--evolution.
> >
>
> So are you suggesting that there should be no interpretation? We all
just
> sit and stare at the fossils with no one saying a word? What do you
want?
> Someone needs to raise the obvious question "What do the fossils mean?"
>
> glenn
>
> Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man
>
> and
>
> Foundation, Fall and Flood
> http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm
>