Evidence for God from Science

Eventhough they are looking at everything from an evolution view-point scientists have discovered that both humans and neanderthals mated with each other.How does your creation interpretation address this?About 100,000 years ago neanderthals and humans mated.How does OEC/Progressive creationism,Theistic evolution,Intelligent Design,Young Earth creationism,the Gap Theory,etc address these issues biblically?
http://phys.org/news/2016-02-neandertha ... ously.html

My creation position might have something to say, but my creation interpretation doesn't say anything because Scripture doesn't touch upon it at all. Although some do think of these as being the nephilim.

That's actually old news, not the recent study, but that we share common DNA.

100k years ago is 1% of human genome segments being found in neanderthals, which is based upon that more recent study. Leading to many to revise there "out of Africa" idea to say some humans left much, much earlier. I have reservations of this based upon such scant data.

Before that 100k study, it was around 40k years ago, people believing neanderthals bred with humans (~1-4% genome shared in Europeans/non-Africans). It was believed this happened as humanity spread out from Africa, going north entering into colder climates where they ran into neanderthals.

Note, studies have shown that segments we share are know to create immunities to this and that disease.

Actual research in science is done without regard to "perspective", politics,
religion, or nationality, still less with regard to which cults favour this or that
outcome

Kurieuo wrote:My creation position might have something to say, but my creation interpretation doesn't say anything because Scripture doesn't touch upon it at all. Although some do think of these as being the nephilim.

That's actually old news, not the recent study, but that we share common DNA.

100k years ago is 1% of human genome segments being found in neanderthals, which is based upon that more recent study. Leading to many to revise there "out of Africa" idea to say some humans left much, much earlier. I have reservations of this based upon such scant data.

Before that 100k study, it was around 40k years ago, people believing neanderthals bred with humans (~1-4% genome shared in Europeans/non-Africans). It was believed this happened as humanity spread out from Africa, going north entering into colder climates where they ran into neanderthals.

Note, studies have shown that segments we share are know to create immunities to this and that disease.

So on average, you'd rather "run into" Neanderthals, or, Genghis K and cohorts?

Audie wrote:So on average, you'd rather "run into" Neanderthals, or, Genghis K and cohorts?

I don't understand.

Audie wrote:Actual research in science is done without regard to "perspective", politics,
religion, or nationality, still less with regard to which cults favour this or that
outcome

That's a joke right?

Kurieuo wrote:My creation position might have something to say, but my creation interpretation doesn't say anything because Scripture doesn't touch upon it at all. Although some do think of these as being the nephilim.

That's actually old news, not the recent study, but that we share common DNA.

100k years ago is 1% of human genome segments being found in neanderthals, which is based upon that more recent study. Leading to many to revise there "out of Africa" idea to say some humans left much, much earlier. I have reservations of this based upon such scant data.

Before that 100k study, it was around 40k years ago, people believing neanderthals bred with humans (~1-4% genome shared in Europeans/non-Africans). It was believed this happened as humanity spread out from Africa, going north entering into colder climates where they ran into neanderthals.

Note, studies have shown that segments we share are know to create immunities to this and that disease.

Yes,it is old news but according to this they have discovered more,it is not just that neanderthals bred with humans but both neanderthals and humans bred with each other. Just alittle more info about it than before. I take it you are skeptical of this new finding? Still how do the different creation positions or interpretations explain this biblically? You bring up nephilim but 100,000 years ago?

ACB, have you taken a look at those scientists who aren't being carried away by hybrid scenarios? And the media, well they're just knowing for blowing things out of proportion.

I mean our society today is carried away with sex this and sex that. BUT, the way it is often portrayed in documentaries and the like is that all the hominids were just having big orgy sessions, rather than competing for food and resources or the like. Survival of the lovers, rather than fittest, right?

Let's throw away any infertility barriers we know are there, because well we (non-Africans) have 1-4% of our genome in common with neanderthals. You know, and while there is scant evidence, lets now claim that actually 50k years prior to humans migrating out of Africa, well there must be a small population who much earlier migrated out of Africa and mated with neanderthals. And I'm just touching upon some issues...

Take a read of these two published studies for alternative possibilities:

• Balancing Selection on a Regulatory Region Exhibiting Ancient Variation That Predates Human–Neandertal Divergence
• Effect of ancient population structure on the degree of polymorphism shared between modern human populations and ancient hominins

Regarding the second here is the abstract:

Recent comparisons between anatomically modern humans and ancient genomes of other hominins have raised the tantalizing, and hotly debated, possibility of hybridization. Although several tests of hybridization have been devised, they all rely on the degree to which different modern populations share genetic polymorphisms with the ancient genomes of other hominins. However, spatial population structure is expected to generate genetic patterns similar to those that might be attributed to hybridization. To investigate this problem, we take Neanderthals as a case study, and build a spatially explicit model of the shared history of anatomically modern humans and this hominin. We show that the excess polymorphism shared between Eurasians and Neanderthals is compatible with scenarios in which no hybridization occurred, and is strongly linked to the strength of population structure in ancient populations. Thus, we recommend caution in inferring admixture from geographic patterns of shared polymorphisms, and argue that future attempts to investigate ancient hybridization between humans and other hominins should explicitly account for population structure.

Here is also, a more layman's article published by media: Neanderthals did not interbreed with humans, scientists find

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:Actual research in science is done without regard to "perspective", politics,
religion, or nationality, still less with regard to which cults favour this or that
outcome

That's a joke right?

How do you think research is done?

I think Audie is saying that it really doesn't matter about creation stances, when it comes to whether humans mated with Neanderthals.

If the evidence shows humans mated with Neanderthals, then it's more likely they did. If the evidence points to Neanderthals and humans not mating, then so be it.

It's a matter of looking at the evidence for or against mating. It's not, "evidence shows mating between humans and Neanderthals, and my creation belief(whatever it may be) says X about Neanderthals, so the evidence must be false".

The fact that Neanderthals and modern humans can mate shows that we are both descendants of Adam and Eve. The belief that they mated 100,000 years ago is obviously wrong since the creation took place much later than that. Here is a link to some information on the subject of Neanderthals from Answers in Genesis:

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evol ... anderthal/

theophilus wrote:The fact that Neanderthals and modern humans can mate shows that we are both descendants of Adam and Eve. The belief that they mated 100,000 years ago is obviously wrong since the creation took place much later than that. Here is a link to some information on the subject of Neanderthals from Answers in Genesis:

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evol ... anderthal/

If it's true that Neanderthals and modern humans could mate and reproduce, then NO, it doesn't show that both are descendants of Adam and Eve. It would just show that both species were close enough to be able to reproduce.

The belief that they mated 100,000 years ago is obviously wrong because someone's creation interpretation says that all of mankind was created much later than that?

Audie, I'm starting to see what you mean. Scientists don't take the evidence and try to make it fit into a preconceived creation stance. That's not science.

And people wonder why certain YEC dogma makes Christians look like idiots!

Interbreeding COULD account for the genetic correlation but as we know, correlation does NOT equal causation.
As the other article posted above shows, there can be other explanations.

IMO:
I know that some people can be really randy and if some neanderthal women were sexy enough ( maybe being hairy was in at the time, like in France) then you know that some Marvin Gaye "getting it on" stuff was gonna happen !

RickD wrote:

theophilus wrote:The fact that Neanderthals and modern humans can mate shows that we are both descendants of Adam and Eve. The belief that they mated 100,000 years ago is obviously wrong since the creation took place much later than that. Here is a link to some information on the subject of Neanderthals from Answers in Genesis:

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evol ... anderthal/

If it's true that Neanderthals and modern humans could mate and reproduce, then NO, it doesn't show that both are descendants of Adam and Eve. It would just show that both species were close enough to be able to reproduce.

The belief that they mated 100,000 years ago is obviously wrong because someone's creation interpretation says that all of mankind was created much later than that?

Audie, I'm starting to see what you mean. Scientists don't take the evidence and try to make it fit into a preconceived creation stance. That's not science.

And people wonder why certain YEC dogma makes Christians look like idiots!

I think we all know scientists are not looking at it from a biblical perspective or creation perspective,but they are looking at it from an evolution perspective and making it fit into that.Evolution is their religion even if they reject a biblical perspective. I know its not important to Audi but most creation perspectives have an answer when it comes to science and as more is discovered alot of times it validates more of God's word. Now based on the posts Kurieuo made I'm not so sure this is true now,obviously there are different interpretations of the data even in science. Still I think the ones who believe they did mate are the majority when it comes to evolution science.

I mean, it explains a lot: