vendredi 18 juin 2010

Human population after Noah, racial and demographic pseudoproblems for creationism

1) Human population after Noah, racial and demographic pseudoproblems for creationism, 2) Have "Humans Interbred with Neanderthals and Denisovans"?, 3) Sorry, Duursma, but all languages have the cases of Proto-Indoeuropean, there is no primitive language ... (which is on Φιλολoγικά/Philologica blog), 4) After Flood and Babel : Was There a PIE Unity?, 5) Chiara Bozzone on Caland System - Short Review, Trubetskoyan Comment (which is again on Φιλολoγικά/Philologica blog)

Numbers: if Noah and three sons with wives were only people alive some five thousand years ago, why are we so many?

A man becomes fertile at fourteen, give and take some years, very extreme limits being nine and eighteen. For a woman the extreme limits are the same, but the mean puberty is twelve. She rests fertile until c. age 60. A man rests unctionnally fertile longer.

A pregnancy takes nine months, but ideally one spaces them out one in two years. You start off with three couples - presuming Noah and wife had no further children, besides where would a fourth son have gotten his wife from? - and their sons (enumerated in Genesis) are free to marry first cousins, but not siblings.

If each one of them has enough empty space and good health, and so on ... the present population would have been reached very long ago.

So why are we so few?

The reasons are sufficiently different among themselves to spare us any so called responsibility for keeping us "few enough".

Colours: if all races - black, white, red and yellow - descend from Shem, Ham and Japheth with wives some five thousand years ago, why are we so different?

Linking to a picture of Halle Berry.

She belongs to the black community of US. Why? Because there are these ethnic communities there, and because solidarity - previously exclusion too - where strong within (previously against) that particular community.

In France 150 years ago, she would have been accepted as a "Caucasian" (White). Alexandre Dumas the Elder was 1/4 grandparents black ancestry, 3/4 grandparents white ancestry. A. D. the Younger was 1/8 great-grandparents black and 7/8 great-grandparents white. He had blue eyes. If he looked a bit more white than Halle (except that or if she has naturally straight hair), his father looked a bit more black than she. Today, here, she might (except she is allready known) pass for a Gipsy, Arab or South Spanish woman. The near extremes of skin colour are then 8 ancestors getting or loosing a melanine gene. Sometimes there is a place for the saying "difference is only skin deep".

Both: how did the races get to the places, like Ararat is no where near either Manhattan or Easter Island?

When I formulated the objection, and included Easter Island, some of you may have guessed I was thinking of Thor Heyerdahl. He was not a creationist, we know from some of his writings he was not just agnostic but a believing Old Earth Evolutionist. He did nothing of what he did harbouring the intention himself of proving creationism possible on this account, but we know he did prove the population of Americas and Oceania after Ararat by boat a technical possibility. The raft he used for Perú - Polynesia and the Reed Boat he used for Heliopolis - Americas were well within technical know-how of Noah with immediate successors. As for the official 20.000 years since Americas were populated, that may very well be a misdating (problems of C14 for very old dates are dealt with by other creationist authors).

Even without Thor Heyerdahl, Easter Island proves "by itself" (or by being populated before Roggeveen, Cook, Bougainville et al.) that population of continents across the sea have been possible before Columbus.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Day of St Ephrem
Bibl. Clignancourt
75018 Paris

Update for modelling of diverging skin colour from mid brown parents:

The sets of AaBb in both parents were given by a CMI video, but here I get out implications according to my knowledge of Mendel's laws:

AaBb * AaBb each has one of two possible melanine plus in each of two locations (each location also permits lack of melanine) regulating possibly different types of melanine = 2+ Note that A/a and B/b are different loci on even different chromosome pairs. Otherwise they would not recombine free, one of them independently of each other.

AA BB 4+ – probably darker than parents
AA Bb 3+ – probably darker than parents
AA bB 3+ – probably darker than parents
AA bb 2+ – as parents, but maybe different shade (like if the 2+ are concerned with same melanine while parents had different ones)

Aa BB 3+ – probably darker than parents
Aa Bb 2+ – as parents
Aa bB 2+ – as parents
Aa bb 1+ – probably lighter skinned than parents

aA BB 3+ – probably darker than parents
aA Bb 2+ – as parents
aA bB 2+ – as parents
aA bb 1+ – probably lighter skinned than parents

aa BB 2+ – as parents, but maybe different shade
aa Bb 1+ – probably lighter skinned than parents
aa bB 1+ – probably lighter skinned than parents
aa bb 0 = no melanine, very light skinned

Note that skin colour is just one parameter differentiating Caucasian from Negroid type, where these two are extremes. Mongoloid type falling usually in between (except some very light skinned Japanese). So called Mulattos – mixed ancestry Caucasian Negroid – are not Mongoloid, but they also fall in between. Some Caucasians even are as dark skinned as these mixed ancestry. Certain Arabs, certain Indians, including many Gipsies.

In hair structure, Negroid and Mongoloid type are extreme, and Caucasians are all the middle out to the extremes. Wavy hair ? Caucasian. And wavy is in middle between curly (where Caucasians get as curly as Negroid type) and straight (where Caucasians get as straight as Mongoloid type).

Hair colour ? One extreme is black. It is over nearly all Negroid and Mongolian types and over a great part of Caucasian type. The other extreme is Blonde and Red head – both only within Caucasian type, when we speak of populations.

Eye colour – different shades of Brown is usual, while Blue and Green eyes come within Caucasian type. Brown eyes in Caucasians do not mean they mixed with Negroids some recent time back in the family, as blue eyes usually would in people of the Negroid type (albinos excepted).

Though in skin colour, Caucasian type is one extreme, thus not very varied, in many other aspects Caucasian type is the spectrum, while Negroid and Mongoloid types are either sharing one extreme of it (like in hair colour) or are at different extremes (like in hair shape).

This does probably mean that Caucasian type is the most mixed and represents kind of the bulk of mankind. Which is a far better explanation of why people showing this type have colonised or deported people not showing it but showing instead Mongoloid or especially Negroid type than the explanation of overall genetic superiority./HGL

vendredi 4 juin 2010

But believing in Noah and his sons makes you a racist, right?

Ham was cursed for laughing at his father, and blacks descend from Ham, so believing this makes you "black submissionist", right?


Ham, when committing his crime, was an adult, even a father. The blacks descend from Kush, one of his sons. The one son who was cursed along with his father was Canaan.

That curse was already fulfilled by Joshua (descending from Shem) and Scipio (descending from Japheth) conquering realms of the Canaaneans/Phœnicians (descending from Ham's son Canaan) and thereby ending a very bad kind of child hating idolatry.

Just for noting it .../HGL


Racism has a recently strong foundation in Darwinism:

A) Polygenism of humanity arguing that Blacks and Whites reach manhood from different lines of Homo Erectus - has, seems, been refuted, but that was after WW-2

B) "Survival of the fittest" arguing against a morality common to all mankind.

Thereby arguing against moral indignation against slave hunters.



Already stated this, says something about politics around certain places that I was actually called "Ham" as opposed to "Hans" in one place last week. I so prefer keeping to the point rather than refuting what should not need refutation ...

Pour francophones tendance monoglottes, sur d'autres blogs

Statistiques pour cette page. [Apparement mis hors fonction.]