Skip to comments.Population and the Age of the Earth
Posted on 01/03/2014 10:54:01 AM PST by fwdude
Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it
How long have people been living on the Earth? The evolutionist says two million years. The Bible-believing Christian says about six thousand. Who is right?
Statistically, a couple must have 2.1 children to keep a population at the same level. In practice, this means a minimum of three children per family. Let us suppose for a moment that the biblical account of the Genesis Flood in which just eight people survived is true. Let us further suppose that each family from this population point in history had 2.4 children on average. This very modest number will take into account all the deaths through infant mortality, plagues and war. How long would it take to reach todays world population? Surprisingly, the answer is just less than five thousand years. This figure fits nicely into known historical records.
Now suppose we take the evolutionary view that mankind has been on this planet for two million years and we begin with two people or eight, it will make little difference and they also had the statistical 2.4 children per family. We will finish up with a number so impossibly large that the universe itself would not hold them! Aware of this problem, the textbooks explain it away by speaking of population stability throughout this time. This is nothing short of an appeal to a miracle! Frankly, the biblical account is far more believable.
Prayer: Jesus, it was through You that all things, including us, were made. When we withdrew our love from God and cut ourselves off from Him through sin, You came to our rescue. How can I ever thank You enough? Amen.
Notes: Cleone H. Weigand. Morality Remains the Best Way to Stem Population Growth. Milwaukee Journal, April 14, 1985.
"This very modest number will take into account all the deaths through infant mortality, plagues and war."
Evolutionists must assume, with no evidence or basis, that these innumerable "resets" must have happened to make their model fit the math.
Why not just believe the more plausible, mathematically sound scenario supplied by Scripture?
Where did they live before that?...................
Even Mr. Malthus could point out that no population can exceed its ability to feed itself. As food grows short, propensity to disease, violence and other elements that limit population increase.
Any child of ten could understand that. The fact that you didn’t does a serious disservice to your position.
So, you’re one of the “population stability throughout this time” banner wavers. The author addressed this argument.
Are you sporting the gun, or the popcorn?
The article is wrong.
How does the author know this? We're nowhere near having an accurate global recorded history of these events going back 5,000 years to base such a claim on.
Yeah but evolutionists would have us believe that man was making tools 200,000 years ago. To believe they couldn't find enough food is not very plausible. They would have dominated the food chain.
If you start with 6 people and double them every 100 years, it takes 28 centuries to reach a billion people.
Population growth has accelerated in the last couple of centuries, but to get the ages evolution requires, man would have had to have remained at very small numbers for a very very very long time. It's not believable.
Thank you Danny. More elegant than I could have been.
wow. I'm convinced.
This article has many unproven assumptions which render its conclusions meaningless.
something tells me we will be overrun with rats within a few centuries ... or will it be rabbits?
Please! The unproven assumptions held by evolutionists are many MULTIPLES of those you assume are in this article.
To me it’s not so much the scientific evidence (though I think that is there) that sways the argument. To me it’s the accurate description of human fallen nature so accurately discribed/displayed in the Biblical narrative - and still so evident today - that does it for me. “He who is without sin let him cast the first stone.” And another of Jesus’ challenges, “Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
Is there any other kind? But I get the purpose behind this term, with so many impostors in society.
“By conservative estimates, the population of the United states prior to European contact was greater than 12 million.”
where did they all go?
The birth rate is a small part of the story of human increase over time. Survival rates are the other part. High infant mortality, high child mortality rates, high adult mortality rates keep the population of the most fecund in check.
We have evidence of population resets; the documented mass deaths from the plague in the 14th century, deaths from the introduction of European diseases into North/South America,deaths from the Spanish Influenza in the 20th, the hundred million murders of Communism around the world in the last century, the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews. In pre history we can detect 16 scars from retrovirus infection that are common to both the Chimpanzee DNA and human DNA, showing not just our common descent from a common ancestor, but also indicating mass infections by retrovirus in our common ancestor, not just once, but many times.
Any evidence of 2.4 being a uniform universal constant? If you care to look, check the CIA world fact book that has fertility rates for just about all countries on the globe. What fraction of countries have a 2.4 fertility rate? Just about none. They range from Niger with 7.03 to Taiwan with 1.11. Does that mean the population of the world will soon be nearly all from Niger? Of course not.
The average is 2.45 when I checked just now, so your 2.4 factor is in error. Of course preaching error is what creationism is all about.