Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Steven Den Beste's essay
Published on January 28, 2006 By Draginol In Pure Technology

Steven Den Beste's site seems to be down but I had a copy fo an article he wrote some time ago that talks about the reason why Noah's Arc is a fairy tale.  There are many many reasons why Noah's Arc is fiction but this is one of the better arguments I've seen.

Steven's site is located here.

I just had the distinct displeasure of encountering someone who is a Biblical literalist (and who actually believes that all evidence supports the fairy tale of Noah's Ark). Let's review the story, briefly:

God decides that the human race is sinful and wants to destroy it. But Noah is virtuous and God warns him about the upcoming catastrophe and tells him to build an Ark (a big ship) and to load it with breeding stock of animals, so as to repopulate the earth. Noah does this, and with his wife and three sons and their wives embarks on the ship. God then covers the earth with water for 40 days and 40 nights, drowning all animals. (It's not completely clear how this would harm whales and seals, but let that go.) Then the water begins to recede and Noah's Ark grounds on Mount Ararat. He releases his animals and the world is repopulated.

This is ecological nonsense. If the whole flora of the world was released from a single point, most of it wouldn't survive and they sure wouldn't be found where they are today.

It's also genetic nonsense. There are a lot of ways of showing this, but one is particularly unambiguous: human Y chromosomes. Nearly all the genetic information each of us carries comes from both our parents. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes and one of each comes from our mothers and one from our fathers. One pair controls the sex of the child. One of these is normal sized and the other is extremely small (relatively speaking), and they're called "X" and "Y" respectively. (But the Y chromosome still carries millions of codons.)

In mammals, XX is female and XY is male. (This is not universal. In birds, XX is male and XY is female. In some insect species, females are diploid and males are haploid. And when you look at plants, sex isn't determined by genetics at all.)

Each human parent contributes 23 chromosomes to the baby, in egg and sperm. The egg always has an X chromosome and the sperm may have an X or a Y (unless there's an abnormality, about which more in a moment). If the sperm has an X then the resulting fertilized egg is XX, thus female. If the sperm has a Y then the fertilized egg is XY, male.

So the sperm cell determines the sex of the child (in mammals). But sometimes when the egg or sperm are formed there's a mistake, and they get more or less than 23 chromosomes. This can happen with any of the chromosomes. When it happens with the sex chromosomes you get individuals who may have three or one instead of the normal two.

If the egg forms wrong and has no X, and if the sperm cell has a Y, then you get a fertilized egg with a Y chromosome but no X chromosome. This egg isn't viable. The X chromosome contains genetic information without which a baby can't develop; the result is a miscarriage (so early, in fact, that the mother may not realize she's been pregnant).

The other three abnormal situations all result in children. If there's only one X chromosome ("Turner's syndrome") then the person looks female. XXY ("Kleinfelter's syndrome") is male. XYY (sometimes called the "supermale") is also male.

The development of male features is controlled by the presence of testosterone in the baby in the womb. This in turn is stimulated by the presence of the Y chromosome. There is, however, an extremely rare condition where the genes which describe the testosterone receptors are damaged, and in such an individual testosterone will be ignored even if it is present. The genes describing those receptors are not on the sex chromosomes but it's possible for them to be present in a person who has a Y chromosome, and if this happens the resulting person will look female. However, such a person will also be sterile, because no ovaries form.

The point is this: if a person is fertile and has a Y chromosome, then that person will be male.

I am male. I have a mother and a father. I got my X chromosome from my mother and my Y chromosome from my father.

Each of them also had two parents, so I have two grandfathers. My father's father gave his Y chromosome to my father. My mother's father gave his X chromosome to my mother.

I got my Y chromosome from my father and he got it from his father. I carry my paternal grandfather's Y chromosome. He got it from his father, and from his paternal grandfather, etc.

My mother got one of her two X chromosomes from her father and one from her mother. There's a 50% chance that the X chromosome I carry came from my maternal grandfather, but no chance whatever that I carry his Y chromosome. (He gave his Y chromosome to my mother's brother, but I'm not descended from my uncle.)

I have many male ancestors but my Y chromosome only came from one of them. I have many male ancestors but only one by strict patrilineal descent. They're the same person. That doesn't mean I have no genetic information from any of my other male ancestors; there are 22 other chromosomes to talk about and I may have gotten some of them from other men way back when. But the Y chromosome itself can only have come from one place, and it is from my strict patrilineal ancestor. My lineage from all my other male ancestors includes at least one intervening woman, and at that step their Y chromosomes were not passed on.

If any two men have the same strict patrilineal ancestor, no matter how far back, then those two men will have the same Y chromosome.

Which brings us back to Noah. According to the story, the ark carried 8 people: Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives. Genetically only five are important, because the three sons carried no genetic information not present in Noah and his wife.

So if the story is true then the entire human race is descended from just five individuals. And four of them were women; Noah is the only man among the five. 10 sex chromosomes, and nine of them are X. Of the ten, only one was a Y. Noah carried it and passed it on to his three sons.

And they passed it on to their sons, and their grandsons, and great grandsons, and ultimately to all living men. So if the Noah story is true then every existing Y chromosome in men should be identical because they'll all be copies of the one carried by Noah.

And they aren't. Human Y chromosomes have been tested many times and they are not all the same. There is enormous variety among them. It is impossible for all human men to have the same strict patrilineal ancestor.

Therefore the Noah story is not true.

 


Comments (Page 3)
9 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last
on Jan 28, 2006
If God's word is true and perfect, how could questioning dent it?

Questioning is a good thing...as long as your mind isn't trying to force the answers to fit into a preconcieved idea.

the Bible wasn't written by God. It was written by men. Holy, inspired men, who were also fallible. Not only that, it has been translated and translated so many times over, and often by men who we cannot even say, in good conscience, were holy and inspired! I believe the Bible to be the word of God, as far as it is translated correctly. But I cannot take it as a perfect, entirely accurate book of text.

I agree, there differences between the KJV Bible and "modern" easy to read translations vary....not to mention the liberal/feminist versions. Who's to say what is right? I think we owe it to ourselves to study....after all LW pointed out the slight difference in translation. I know of many places where understanding the Hebrew text (or other near-orginial) can shed light on something.

I don't believe God would let his Word get so screwed up that the "stories" are not true.

Why not? He let millions of his chosen people die and even now, he allows horrible things to happen. Why should he get anal about a typo if he isnt' going to step in for the big stuff?


on Jan 28, 2006

Andrew, your link sent me to the Wikepedia definition of the word Black. ?


That's because JoeUser decided that the link ended after the word "Black".

That happens often. Copy and paste the rest of the line into the URL field and it will work.
on Jan 28, 2006

He let millions of his chosen people die and even now, he allows horrible things to happen.


I haven't seen Him allow horrible things to happen.

on Jan 28, 2006

He let millions of his chosen people die and even now, he allows horrible things to happen.



I haven't seen Him allow horrible things to happen.

HE does not interfere.  HE allowed us free will.  That means to do good, or evil.  One cannot do evil if HE interferes.

on Jan 28, 2006

HE does not interfere.  HE allowed us free will.  That means to do good, or evil.  One cannot do evil if HE interferes.


Exactly.

But what about natural catastrophes? Some bad things are not caused by man.

on Jan 28, 2006

But what about natural catastrophes? Some bad things are not caused by man.

Stercus Ferri

on Jan 28, 2006
Stercus Ferri


what does transporting manure have to do with anything?
on Jan 28, 2006
I figure lots of things happen to teach people lessons.

I take a look at my life and the stuff that's happened. It hasn't been a cake walk by any means. In fact, it down right sucked. But God used those experiences to teach me invaluable lessons I never would have learned otherwise.
on Jan 28, 2006
Depending on what side of the argument you are on...you can either prove or disprove the flood.

if noahs flood were true, youd expect to find billions of dead things, buried by rock layers, laid down by water, all over the earth. And you know what we do find? .......Bingo.

And the people who dont believe in the flood say "but all you see are billions of dead things, buried by rock layers, laid down by water all over the earth. "

The Bible wasnt local. it specifically says that it covered the high mountains...so its impossible for that to cover...say Mt. Everest and not cover anything else. If you read it carefully, it mentions in 30 different ways of how it was a global flood.

Then there is also the simple situation of fossils. Fossilization (according to evolutionists) is when a fish dies...sinks to the bottom and is slowly covered in mud. The thing here is that most fish float when they die...they float up to the surface. By the time they get to the bottom, they have been ripped apart by scavengers. In order for them to be fossilized...they need to be covered quickly. A global flood would do this. There are fossils found in miles thick mud all over the earth. If a meteor hit...the fossilization would only be localized, not spread throughout the world.
on Jan 29, 2006

Actually, man has been traced to a single woman in Africa about 250,000 years ago. Who is to say she was or was not monogamous? Sure we evolved (and it was a lot more than 7 million years), but somewhere a mutation occurred and man came about.
That was my point. I was not arguing, nor do I beleive, that we are all descended from Noah. Only that the story may be true, but their world was not the entire globe at the time.

Sigh. No Dr. Guy. What you are referring to is the so-called "Eve".  What they have said is that all human beings alive today are RELATED to each other going back at least 250,000 years ago. Which is to say "Of course!".  We are all distantly related if you go far enough back.

on Jan 29, 2006

So...basically the whole account is bunk? Like it had never rained upon the earth? And that it's completely impossible for God to make it rain for 40 days and 40 nights?

Who gives us the right to pick and choose what in the Bible is literal or not? If I think that God is who He says He is, and I believe that He's all-knowing and all-powerful, it opens a whole lot more doors.

Absolutely. As soon as we throw up our arms and say "A magical super being did it." Then anything is possible.  Why God? Why not several Gods?

BTW, BlueDev, DenBeste knows his stuff pretty well. Before using his post to perfect your talent and being arrogant, you should check out his writings. He's pretty sharp.  His point, and I agree with this, is that the generic variation in the Y chromosome is far far too varied today to all have come from a few thousand years ago.  I don't claim to be a microbiologist but I do have a pretty decent understanding of genetic mutation and that some mutations mutate at a relatively steady rate (when lookeda to over a long period of time).

They have used those techniques to build a evolutionary tree of humankind. 

Simply put, the genetic differences between humans is far too varied for us to have originated from a small group a few thousand years ago. That's basically his essay in a nutshell.

on Jan 29, 2006

what does transporting manure have to do with anything?

If you look at it for the cliche value, you would know it means Crap Happens, and not transporting poop.

on Jan 29, 2006

Sigh. No Dr. Guy. What you are referring to is the so-called "Eve". What they have said is that all human beings alive today are RELATED to each other going back at least 250,000 years ago. Which is to say "Of course!". We are all distantly related if you go far enough back.

I guess I am missing the point as that is what I was saying.  Somewhere in time (since man did not spring from nothing to full population - unless you beleive the bible literally), a mutation occurred and man was born.  So we are all traced to a single point in time, whether it was 7 million, 250,000 or 10,000 years ago.  So in that respect, all males shared that Y chormosone at one time.  Or all apes.  or all fish, or all Ameobas.  Somewhere there is a single source. And they are not all the same now.

on Jan 29, 2006

if noahs flood were true, youd expect to find billions of dead things, buried by rock layers, laid down by water, all over the earth. And you know what we do find? .......Bingo.

And the people who dont believe in the flood say "but all you see are billions of dead things, buried by rock layers, laid down by water all over the earth. "

The Bible wasnt local. it specifically says that it covered the high mountains...so its impossible for that to cover...say Mt. Everest and not cover anything else. If you read it carefully, it mentions in 30 different ways of how it was a global flood.

Then there is also the simple situation of fossils. Fossilization (according to evolutionists) is when a fish dies...sinks to the bottom and is slowly covered in mud. The thing here is that most fish float when they die...they float up to the surface. By the time they get to the bottom, they have been ripped apart by scavengers. In order for them to be fossilized...they need to be covered quickly. A global flood would do this. There are fossils found in miles thick mud all over the earth. If a meteor hit...the fossilization would only be localized, not spread throughout the world.

Well first of all, it takes more than 40 days or 40 weeks even to form a rock layer.  More like 40,000 years.

Do I need to mention that fish wouldn't die in a global flood?  

Bakerstreet: As you can see, there are people who think that Noah's Ark actually occurred as mentioned literally in the bible. 

on Jan 29, 2006
Simply put, the genetic differences between humans is far too varied for us to have originated from a small group a few thousand years ago. That's basically his essay in a nutshell.


Then he needs to tone down his hyperbole. It just smacks of ignorance.

And, as I mentioned, I don't disagree with that point actually, as I said I don't take the account literally. But using absolutes the way the article does completely weakens his argument.
9 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last