[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 13 KB, 363x364, ncfom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3965138 No.3965138 [Reply] [Original]

http://www.icr.org/article/a-7-billion-whyd-it-take-so-long/

"The population of 7 billion currently fits biblical time conceptions better than evolutionary time conceptions..."

>> No.3965139

sage

>> No.3965149

OP is genus Homo

>> No.3965153

>>3965138
>does not understand exponential growth

>> No.3965164

>>3965138

why aren't there 7 billion leopards? Or 7 billion chimpanzees?

>> No.3965181

yes, op. i believe there's a god now.

you win.

I'm gonna go and play some dark souls now.

>> No.3965385

>>3965164

wow, you sound smart

>> No.3965402

>>3965164
actually this is an argument against evolution, and in favor of the bible

>> No.3965411

Quoting OP's source:
>Using census records from the last 400 years and a bit of algebra, and assuming a natural logarithmic growth, eight Flood survivors 4,500 years ago produce 7 billion people almost exactly

nuff said

>> No.3965445
File: 18 KB, 250x250, ISHYGDDT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3965445

>>3965138
>The population of 7 billion currently fits biblical time conceptions better than evolutionary time conceptions...
> Implying there weren't plagues that killed large parts of the population
> Implying there wasn't ever widespread famine that killed large parts of the population
> Implying there weren't natural disasters that killed large parts of the population
> Implying there weren't wars and conquests that killed large parts of the population
 
> Implying Implications
> 2011

>> No.3965642

Is this all you can do /sci/ ?

>> No.3965688

it's like they think about something for a little while and conclude: 'Wow, the bible totally makes sense in this context.'. Then they think it through a little further, getting more and more agitated before settling on their previous half baked conclusion.

I wonder if it's deliberately or they really lack the necessary critical thinking skills ?

>> No.3965708

>>3965688
have you ever tried talking to a christian about theological issues? absolutely no critical thinking at all. some of them are doctors and lawyers even

>> No.3965716

>>3965708
Occasionally it's general stupidity, but more often it's just a blind spot. What would you call it? Cognitive dissonance? Doublethink? Inconsistency, Dishonesty or hypocrisy?

>> No.3965721

>>3965688
>>3965708
>>3965716


tl;dr they're fucking nuts and get in groups talking about how they can strengthen their "faith" i.e. delusion.

My roommate is a fucking nutcase. I've heard him talking about a mental breakdown and schizophrenia and he's super religious. It's like video games but less fun.

>> No.3965727

>>3965385

Really? Tell me more about population dymanics.

>> No.3965730

>>3965402

no. There are no real scientific arguments that favor the 'biblical' view..

>> No.3965737

>>3965727 I don't know much about so I don't talk about it to people on the net.

What I know is, you have to be pretty dumb to make out "7 billion leopards? Or 7 billion chimpanzees?" out of the article

>> No.3965747

>>3965721
I don't mind most people's faiths (in god or whatever) but if you have a particularly strong personality, it's probably best if you offset it with a less intense hobby. trouble is you don't often have a choice, like with other past times. I tend to think of religion as an innate condition that members of the species are afflicted with every generation or so. Exacerbated with intergenerational reinforcement (some would say indoctrination, others would say teaching.) As long as there are unanswerable questions, we'll never be rid of it. It's really just an inescapable condition stemming from the nature of existing within something, being confined to viewing internally, which leads to the assumption that there can be an 'existence' external to the system.

>> No.3965780

>>3965737

you have the inference abilities of a chimp... the implication of the article is that population growth can be calculated based on time alone ..... you only have to look at the populations of ANY FUCKING SPECIES ON EARTH to know that is nonsense.

>> No.3965823
File: 25 KB, 499x391, thisisdog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3965823

>>3965780
ah yeah you're actually right, thanks for clearing that up

>> No.3965827

>>3965747
i don' think its some existential imperative. people like to form groups and be part of something even if its irrational. some join gangs, others become christfags. we surf 4chan even though its just wasting time

it's not that i look down on these people, actually they seem very blissful in their delusions. if only seeking the truth could be so fulfilling

>> No.3965839

>>3965164
because we kill them all, oh and we have medicine, this allows us to survive longer than we naturally should, and it keeps their populations down.

>> No.3965844

>>3965827
>i don' think its some existential imperative.

There's too much across all the literature about ontology for it not be that. Sure people can join up for any reason, it's maintain for all sorts of reason philosophical and just out of stubbornness and refusal to accept defeat. But it's fundamentally deeper than that

>> No.3965939

black plague ,spanish flu and 1 child chinese policy

/thread