lovelylil:
You said several bottlenecks have been "inferred" from the gentic data? What does the word "inferred" mean to you? "inferred" does not neccesarily mean deffinate. I understand what you are saying though. When Scientists say it is "inferred" they believe more probable than not according to the data they have at the time.
That's correct. The hypothesis that there were genetic bottlenecks in the history of various species is the one which best fits the available data. I don't think there are even any serious competing hypotheses in this case. It's the only non-absurd explanation of the facts.
The second is: The WT claims that since the universe is expanding - that is evidence that at one time it had a beginning and is proof of God. If someone agreed with this premise but instead of believing in the God of the WT - believed that the energy or force behind what thrust the universe in motion was what represents "God" to them, would evolutionists have a problem with this?
The universe is expanding, which is (probably) proof of a beginning, but not of the existence of God. Strictly speaking, evolutionists would have little to say on the matter. Evolution remains a fact whether or not a god or gods began the process. Personally, I have a problem with calling "energy or force" God. It confuses the issue. If it doesn't have a personality or an interest in its creation, it's not a god.
What are your personal views of the intelligent design theory? Some think it is a step towards believing in God by saying there is an "intelligence" behind all things in the universe but they are not willing to go as far as attributing this "intelligence" to a "God" without being able to scientifically prove God exists.
"Intelligent design" is just creationism with a new name, and a respectable but wafer-thin veneer. It really doesn't matter whether those who believe it are religious or not though, as it is unsupported by the evidence, and has the same problem as any variations on the Argument of Design, namely, who designed the designer?
I personally believe the flood story is based on some fact, even if you say it is myth. Some myths are based on fact.
There definitely wasn't a global flood, there definitely wasn't a 450-foot long wooden boat built by four men and their wives, rainwater never covered the tops of mountains, a pair or more of each kind of animal weren't loaded on to the boat (no matter how broadly you define "kind", and it didn't rain for 40 days. Certainly, there were floods in the past just as today, but none of the details of the story can possibly be even remotely accurate.
In researching Noahs' flood and the epic of Gilgamesh I discovered that even though the Gilgamesh epic was written on tablets first - the genesis flood may be older. Why? becuase you have to take into consideration that oral tales were passed on sometimes for generations before they were written down. I believe this is true with Moses. The evidence in the books attributed to him (most I believe written by others, possible a scribe) shows that he "edited" the flood story he heard which was much older than his time. This could mean one of two things: Noah's flood was earlier than we think or the story was in fact based on Gilgamesh.
It could be older, but there's absolutely no evidence of that. If it is older, then it survived at least a thousand years without being written down, so any factual basis it may have had would have been long since lost. It seems, though, that it is just another story the Jews picked up from the Babylonians.
I agree with most of the aspects of evolution. There is no way that two birds Noah took on the ark in a few thousand years became all the species we have today. It would have taken millions of years. Lilly
Of course, although of there would never have been just two birds. Evolution works on populations, not individuals.
I found some bible scriptures that seem to show the tale of Noah is much older.
I don't even know how the bible could be used to prove such a thing. The written record of the bible is not as old as the written record of the Gilgamesh epic, and if you take Bible chronology as accurate, the latter would have been written within the lifetime of Noah, or very shortly afterward.
