shouldn't we expect to see huge (macro) changes in a few million years?
2007-05-04 04:27:39 · 11 answers · asked by Eleventy 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Yeah we should.
2007-05-04 04:30:42 · answer #1 · answered by SatanicYoda 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
But Noah didn't. He couldn't have. An initial population of TWO does not provide nearly enough genetic variation to create all of the breeds you see today--rather, the lack of variation would have caused every species there were allegedly only two of after the alleged flood to soon become extinct at the first change of environment. Simply put, two is too small a population for natural selection to be able to really adapt the population to anything adequately.
2007-05-04 11:32:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
My guess is that extensive human/dog/elephant breading took place and that is where we get so many different types of dogs. This is not supported anywhere in the Bible, but all you have to do is look at the scientific record and you will easily see that a Yorkie is 2/3 human and 1/3 elephant.
2007-05-04 11:33:02 · answer #3 · answered by Kurt Stevenson 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Possibly, however it only takes a few generations to get a new "breed".
But evolution claims that mutations evolve things. Mutations and evolution remove genetic material not add to it. Macro evolution should actually be called genetic diversification, because evolution means you get a completely NEW creature, however, if that were the case they would not be viable offspring.
That means that the offspring can have offspring. Horse and donkey make mule. But mules cannot have babies.
Macro-evolution actually disproves EVILUTION.
2007-05-04 11:38:52 · answer #4 · answered by Batty1970 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
maybe he thought that they were different animals because each breed looks different.. and Noah brought about 800 pairs of dogs inside the ark.. whahaha
2007-05-04 11:39:42 · answer #5 · answered by sajirvill 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Evolution is a fact all the way back to the first life form but not beyond.
2007-05-04 11:33:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I see what you mean, definitely.
According to the Future Is Wild, the next species to rule the earth will evolve from squid. Pass the calamari! :-)
2007-05-04 11:32:19 · answer #7 · answered by GreenEyedLilo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
maybe at that time it was possible for some animals to breed with others. Like a dog and a cat. hahaAAAHAAAA!
2007-05-04 11:34:55 · answer #8 · answered by f4bulous1985 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
are you saying the bible shouldn't be taken literally, or that there are some contradictions in it? man you are pure genius
you have proven it to me, does this say anything about God though? or does it simply say that men wrote the bible
perhaps we could get chuck norris to rewrite the bible
2007-05-04 11:36:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It depends what was programmed into the species.
We'll find out eventually.
2007-05-04 11:32:14 · answer #10 · answered by Uncle Thesis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and in people too
2007-05-04 11:31:23 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋