Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Yo Atheist, where in the hell did everybody go?

If man has been around for a million years and presumably getting at least a little action, where are all the people at? The Earth would really be crowded, and you'd think filled with a lot of bones somewhere? There is no evidence of either.

You can find out for yourself using secular resources only that if a handful people started having sex with one another around the time of the Biblical account of the flood, there should be about 6.8 billion people on the planet.

These non Christian sources, statisticians, anthropologists and experts in the field of demographics have calculated these numbers. Taking in the effects of disease, wars, famines and cultural beliefs that in 1820 there should have been about 1.6 billion people on Earth. In 1920 there should have been about 2 billion people, in 1970 there should have been about 4 billion people, and today there should be about 6.8 billion people. Wow, you'd think some Christian would have fudged these numbers there so accurate. They also figure by 2050 there will be about 9 billion people on Earth. (Unless the Duggars stay married, that might skew their numbers quite a bit?)

So once again, if we've been here so long,(750,000 years 0r maybe a million) where's everybody at? Do the math yourself, you think the line in McDonald's in long now?

Peace Out, feeno

27 comments:

  1. The anti-creationist people do have an answer: It's the Bottleneck Theory, but even they struggle explaining this theory while keeping a straight face. You can do your own research but I'll paraphrase for you. I think the women all had headaches then one day they invented aspirin and we all started having sex again, around the time of Noah's Ark maybe? Or maybe we were all about to go extinct and many of us were killed off by a volcano (Toba Catastrophe Theory).

    If you have any other ideas feel free to leave them here.

    Later, feeno

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Bottleneck Theory? Hmmmm. I'll google it sometime. Thanks feeno.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello!

    I have seen a few of your comments and decided to take a look at your blogs. I thought I might drop you a line as well because I think you are a funny guy! And you do seem to be a good guy in general.

    I am sure everybody laughs a lot when reading your stuff. Some because they think you're funny.... but some because they think you're a dumbass...

    The quote that made me laugh the most was this one:

    "[...] wait around another 100 years or so and then we'll have proof. Some guy named Darwin said the same thing about how we will find all these fossil records that will prove him correct. (I'm still waiting btw.)"

    LOL, thanks again for the good laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I thought another blogger (recently) put it alot better than I ever could Hugo.

    "I am a skeptic who is highly dubious about the theory of evolution by natural selection for three reasons. First, I see it as a dynamic and oftentimes tautological theory of little material value to science. This may change in the future, of course, but since it has been around for 150 years without producing much in the way of practical utility or reliable information, and has even hampered the development of more useful biological science, I see little sign of that changing anytime soon. Second, the predictive models evolutionary theory produces are reliably incorrect and fall well short of the standard set by the hard sciences. In fact, they seldom even rise to the much lower standard of the social sciences. Third, the theory of evolution by natural selection does not rest on a scientific foundation, but a logical one; it is no more inherently scientific than the Summa Theologica. Since our discourse is not intended to be about evolution, but religion proper, I will not go into further detail on the subject in this dialogue except to say that all three of those statements can be verified in substantial detail by anyone who wishes to investigate the matter." Link

    ReplyDelete
  5. And BTW, it's time for another post Feeno.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey! Thanks for the comment on my pseudo-blog, at least I know that you read mine ;)

    I hope I did not insult you because I did mean it when I said that you seem like a good guy. It's exactly the same as when you watch a comedian giving his show, sometimes you laugh when it's funny, but sometimes you laugh because it's just dumb ;)

    Anyway, I guess I could start writing a real blog, that could be fun...

    Oh and no matter what, you do have a hot wife and cool girls so you're already a step ahead from me, lol!

    Regards,
    Hugo

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hold on Feeno... 6.8 billion people on Earth as of this day sounds about right. Maybe I don't understand the question.

    ReplyDelete
  8. LOL. If the population can't support itself, people die.
    And wars, disease.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Gorth

    I tried to get on your blog but I think the Devil is blocking me? As far as my post is concerned these numbers weren't provided by Christians and I agree with them. They calculated all sorts of things. Maybe it's just a coincidence that our population coincides with the bible's account?

    Shalomie Homie, feeno

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Maybe it's just a coincidence that our population coincides with the bible's account?"

    The Bible makes account of the number of people that will be on Earth in the 21st century?

    Did I miss something here?

    It's somewhat ironic because I was talking with a Catholic recently and he was insulted by the fact that I just mentioned creationists who believe the Earth could be 6,000 years old.

    He quickly told me that the Bible does NOT say such thing and that he accepted what science says about such subject. At least we agreed on that! I hope you do too feeno! Because the age of the Earth is definitely not a proof that God does not exist... nothing to fear there ;)

    Some people do leave the door open to that non-sense however, it's incredible don't you think...?

    Oh but you actually have one of these assholes commenting on this blog!! You know who that is? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hugo

    I hate to dissapoint you but the Earth is only about 6000 yr old. If that makes me a rube or a asshole in peoples eyes I will have to learn to get over it.

    Peace Brah, feeno

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm on Brians computer at church, I can't figure out how to put my name on here instead of Brians. But it's actually me, feeno. Sorry about the confusion and to anyone named Brian.

    Later Homies, feeno

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey feeno,

    Sorry I've been kinda busy lately. I have your blog bookmarked! But I haven't gotten around to checking it too frequently....so I guess now I'll just leave several comments all at once for you :P

    Anyway, I'm not entirely sure what your question is here...why aren't there more people on earth NOW? Or why don't we find fossils/artifacts of more people from the PAST? If you could give a link or whatever to the stats you were talking about, as well, that would make things a lot easier.

    But anyway, sorry to burst your bubble, but the Earth is actually 4 1/2 billion years old....I know that because God told me so in a dream....lol just kidding :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. feeno, aka Brian ;), said:

    I hate to dissapoint you but the Earth is only about 6000 yr old.

    I am always impressed by the willful ignorance portrayed by sentences like this one.

    You do realize that it contradicts astrophysics, paleontology, history, geology at the same time?

    ReplyDelete
  15. @JD

    Ok, at your request, I will address the points you made. Actually, you did not make any point yourself, just a copy/paste of a paragraph from Vox Popoli's blog, so I guess I will give you links to read too...

    "First, I see it as a dynamic and oftentimes tautological theory of little material value to science. This may change in the future, of course, but since it has been around for 150 years without producing much in the way of practical utility or reliable information, and has even hampered the development of more useful biological science, I see little sign of that changing anytime soon "

    Argument from ignorance
    The Theory of Evolution is the basis of modern biology which provide us with a great deal of information on how the living world works, and it's also useful in medicine to learn about bacteria, microbes, viruses, etc... that all evolve.
    http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA215.html

    ********************
    Side note: I wrote my short explanation before referring to the talkorigins website, and guess what's the first line...

    "Evolutionary theory is the framework tying together all of biology. It explains similarities and differences between organisms, fossils, biogeography, drug resistance, extreme features such as the peacock's tail, relative virulence of parasites, and much more besides. Without the theory of evolution, it would still be possible to know much about biology, but not to understand it."

    So you see, that's what I mean by always trying to correct myself. I wrote an answer, and then went to look for information to make sure I did not say stupid stuff... Of course if it were something less obvious I would have taken much more time to look for information and provide you with peer-reviewed articles, but the quote from Vox Popoli is just a general bare assertion so no need to go farther here.
    ********************

    Second point:
    "predictive models evolutionary theory produces are reliably incorrect and fall well short of the standard set by the hard sciences. In fact, they seldom even rise to the much lower standard of the social sciences"

    Argument from ignorance again...
    Any example of when models fail? Of course not, because there is not a single observation up to this day that contradicted Evolution Theory. My favourite example is when scientists found out that chimpanzees and humans don't have the same number of chromosomes. That raised some questions of course because, if we are closely related, Evolution Theory tells us that we must be able to explain that difference. Well guess what, it's human chromosome #2! Chromosomes have markers at their end, but in chromosome #2 we see fading markers right in the middle, thus proving that it was, a long time ago, two separate chromosomes.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome_2


    Oh, you just wrote a response, I'll stop here for now and go take a look...

    ReplyDelete
  16. The average female mouse has 20 litters a year.
    The average litter size is 10-12.
    (Lets assume half are female).
    So that's 10 pairs of male and female mice.
    Breeding onset is at about 50 days of age in both females and males.
    The average life span of a mouse is 24 to 36 months.
    To keep the numbers low, lets assume they die young at about 2 years, 50 days.
    That means every female mouse spits out 20 pairs of mice who can breed.
    With these numbers calculate how many mice there should be in mice decended from a pair of mice from Noah's Ark 5000 years ago.
    Okay, now that you've done that, how come we are not in a sea of mice several meters deep?

    Bottleneck.

    (mouse statistics from Wikipedia)

    "Maybe it's just a coincidence that our population coincides with the bible's account?"\

    ? The Bible tells you the population in the 21st century?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Jeff

    For now to keep things simple, yeah, why aren't there more people on the Earth.

    Gorth

    I dunno maybe birds, snakes, foxes etc are plowing through them like feeno at the Golden Corral?

    Hugo,

    I am impressive, good lookin' out.

    Peace out sour kraut, feeno

    ReplyDelete
  18. @feeno
    "I dunno maybe birds, snakes, foxes etc are plowing through them like feeno at the Golden Corral?"

    And why isn't that the case for humans? We never experienced predators? diseases? cataclysms?

    "I am impressive, good lookin' out."
    lol, funny, as usual ;)

    So you do reject geology, just to name that one? You don't believe that tectonic plates move? You don't believe that million/billion years old rocks were ever found? You don't believe volcanoes exists? Well I hope you'll at least agree with this last one ;)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Glad Gorth actually got around to explaining bottlenecks. It need not even be as drastic as a bottleneck, because the main issue is the volume of the bottle. When space and resources are limited, a population will not increase exponentially forever.

    I'd like to know two things, Feeno:

    1. What are these non-Christian sources? Could you link to one or two, or are you making a second- or third-hand claim?

    2. What do you think happened to all the people? You've said the current population isn't consistent even with post-Flood-only population growth. Do you think humans are even younger than that, or that God has been secretly making people vanish the whole time?

    ReplyDelete
  20. LX

    Thanks for coming by. I'm gonna try to make this as simple as possible. (for my sake, not yours).

    According to http://www.atgc.org/timeline_data_fil
    a site which promotes the Earth being 10,000,000,000 years old, not 6,000 claims around the time of Christ there was 170 million people on Earth. That number seems reasonable to me. Now if we trace back through 4,000 years of generations (around the time of Noah, you would expect to find a small handful of people. I say it's Noah and his peeps.

    In order to say the Earth is very old you need to have theories as to why the Earth isn't over populated. So we have Toba or bottleneck? I guess we were all killed off by a volcano instead of a flood or our sperm was all frozen during the ice-age and didn't warm up until 6,000 years ago?

    Shalom, feeno

    ReplyDelete
  21. feeno,

    Surely you've seen graph such as this one that show that the world population has remained fairly stable for most of human history. Certainly with (relatively) few people around, spread out over most of the earth, we wouldn't expect to find much evidence of them. But the evidence is there. For example, ziggurats have been dated well around the 6th century BCE. Cave paintings have been found all over the world, and some of the oldest in Chauvet, France are estimated to be somewhere between 20,000 to 30,000 years ago. According to Wikipedia, an archaeologist that disputes these dates still puts them somewhere around 10,000 years old.

    So the evidence is there (and this is coming from a non-archaeologist and non-anthropologist - I'm sure they would have many more examples). Bottleneck or no bottleneck, we can be sure that humans lived long before the supposed creation of the universe. We can also be reasonable assured that the population remained relatively stable from that point on, until we get into today's modern advancements.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The link is just the following.

    http://www.atgc.org/TimeLine

    If you count back 4,000 years BC, you reach the supposed Creation, not the Flood which supposedly happened almost 2,000 years later. So you're actually relying on a tremendous population explosion to go from one family to 170 million people in only about 100 generations. That means it had to double about every four generations or 80-100 years. That's a tough call with infrastructure wiped out worldwide, as well as all professional knowledge except what Noah carried with him.

    The ATGC link is far more conservative, extrapolating a population of 4 million in 10,000 BC. That's back in the Stone Age, so we're talking about the last of the cavemen here. Nomadic hunter-gatherers, fresh out of an Ice Age (and there's a good reason for a population freeze if ever there was one, despite your joke), far more concerned with their own families' survival than their exponential growth.

    As human technology increases, so too did the availability of critical resources we need to thrive. As time progresses, therefore, one expects the rate of exponential growth to increase. This is exactly what we find: between 2000 BC and AD 1000 the population doubled every 500-1000 years, in the 17th and 18th centuries it doubled about every 100 years and in the 20th century it doubled every few decades. Mark that; only in the last 200-300 years have we seen the kind of growth you expect there to have been immediately after Noah.

    Conversely, if you go back in time the rate decreases. Starting with the model's estimate of 4 million in 10,000 BC, even if the population doubles every 500 years that means you start with a population of four or so 100,000 years before. With the population growing as fast as (or faster than) it can be expected to, the point of origin is over a hundred thousand years ago. Since we would expect the rate to be lower than that, the real point of origin is even further back.

    Get out a calculator and play with it. See if you get similar results. If not, let me know.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I missed the fact that you put the evolutionist starting point 750,000 to 1,000,000 years ago. That's too far; modern humans have only been around for about 200,000 years. The math above looks even better in that context.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Actually he wrote:

    "a site which promotes the Earth being 10,000,000,000 years old"

    :)

    But the site in question:
    http://www.atgc.org/timeline_data_fil
    is not a valid link

    Can you tell us what you were referring to feeno?

    ReplyDelete
  25. As I said, Hugo, go here:

    http://www.atgc.org/TimeLine

    Feeno did say man had been around for a million years. When he said ten billion he was referring to the age of the earth. It's actually more like four and a half billion.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Oh, yes you are right, I had already looked at your link actually, lol

    Sorry I just read your email and replied quickly.

    I just thought it was hilarious to read about a 10G year old Earth, not as much ridiculous as a 6k year old Earth, but much more original ;)

    ReplyDelete
  27. Feenoligist said...."The Earth would really be crowded, and you'd think filled with a lot of bones somewhere? There is no evidence of either."

    Da leg bone conected to da hip bone ..L.o.L

    Naaa ..Bones dont always last forever Feeno,unless they happen to end up in special places where they get preserved ..Most often they just rot away to sludge then dirt etc

    In the old days folks never hobbled down to the local funeral director and asked him....Hey my homie can you pump the relation full of that preservative stuff for me please.

    Peace out feeno

    ReplyDelete