JDay123 at BellSouth.net (Jd) wrote:
>Bob LeChevalier <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote:
>>JDay123 at BellSouth.net (Jd) wrote:
>>>Bob LeChevalier <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote:
>>>>>The logical conclusion to that argument is that evolution is static
>>>>>when it comes to humans,
>>>>>>>>Humans are probably MORE static than other species because we have
>>>>spread worldwide, adapt our environment to fit us (therefore reducing
>>>>the long term evolutionary events of a changing environment), and
>>>>interbreed with little regard to geography (thereby preventing
>>>>geographical isolation, which is a significant factor in more rapid
>>>>>>Sure Bob. They also felt nice and comfy in the days of Noah.
>>>>What does this have to do with the above discussion? Noah has nothing
>>to do with evolution, or with static or changing environments (a
>>sudden, one-time, flood might wipe out species, but hardly constitutes
>>the sort of changing environment that would cause new ones to emerge.
>>Nor does he have anything to do with race.
>>Obviously they thought they had adapted their "environment to fit
>us" (your words) but were completely wrong.
4000 years ago, we had not nearly adapted our environment to the
extent that we have done so in the modern era.
>>Of course, if the flood had truly been worldwide, Noah could not have
>>gotten two of every species on the ark.
>>What does that have to do with the above discussion?
If it were not a worldwide flood, then adaptation is not an issue.
There are floods in multitude every year that kill people, and some
kill hundreds or thousands of people.