Human Creation Model response 1

nygreenguy wrote:You propose an untestable causal agent. That right there kicks it out of science.

Evolution has abiogenesis as its starting point, which is untestable. Or if you believe in panspermia instead, that is also untestable.

– All humanity traces lineage to one man and one woman.

How does this seperate itself from evolution?

You tell me. Does human evolutionary theory posit that humans arose from one couple?

– There is no gradual transition from animals (specifically primates) to humans.

We dont see this

We don’t even see a gradual transition from hominids as I pointed out earlier.

– Humanity traces origins to around the Middle East area.

How does this differ from evolution?

It is only recent that has science has come around to this position. The human creation model predicted this well before science confirmed it. Further, human evolutionary theory could not have predicted this.

– Origin of man traces to tens of thousands of years ago.

Evidence proves otherwise

As Grumpy states – “Maybe you are talking about the end of the last Ice Age between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago, that’s when Homo Sapiens Sapiens appears.”

– Greater genetic diversity of females than males during the Flood. Males were direct descendants of Noah. Their wives were not direct descendants of Noah’s wife.

This violates almost every ecological principal known to man.

Go ahead and present “almost every ecological principal known to man” that it violates.

– Human culture should appear quickly in history.

This doesnt prove anything. The development of writing can lead to this.

It’s not limited to writing, but in many other areas of human activity – art, agriculture, religion, tools, cooking, language.

– A gradual transition is found from animals to humans in the fossil record.
– Genetic changes from one species to another and leading to humans are identified.

done and done.

Present your evidence.