Robittybob1

I have been looking for some sort effect like this for a few months now. Could there even be fluctuations in the electrical balance in the Earth which reflects the charge in the Outer Core causing magnetic pole reversal? If for long periods there is net positive and then changing to net negative charge, the flow of the charged stream of molten metal would represent an alternating current, would it not?

Well I have already agreed it could be forged, but only with the help of an expert in paleography. Until that is proven it stands as genuine. You were trying to make it sound easy but I would hazard a guess you have never actually tried it yourself. So you think it would be easy till the scientific community started pulling it apart and threatening you with 20 years imprisonment for being a fraud.

Have you ever forged a document? Say a document at work? Forged an account or a cheque? If you have I'll agree it can be done, but till you have had experience, I just about guarantee you'll make an obvious visible mistake.

What language was it written in? What was the style and the spelling of those words in 61 AD? They are questions only experts in calligraphy (there is another word for a person who studies this? paleography) will know. Did this Golan guy know enough about that to forge that? http://www.ancientscripts.com/aramaic.html Each region would have had its own styles too. It had to be done by a very knowledgable person or else errors would have shown up. http://jamesossuarytrial.blogspot.co.nz/ I like the pun at the end!

The story of Noah's Ark was one of the first things I found real suspect about the Bible. There is no way there is enough water in the Earth to cover all the lands, mountains etc. Yet I do believe the Earth did have a lot more water on it billions of years ago. Could Muslims drop the idea of Adam and Eve and Noah and become modernised?

Well what is that something?

And if wasn't Golan it could be one of the hundreds of generations before him, but because if it has been forged it must have been done by a genius for the the lettering is so perfect for that period in time, written in a forgotten language. Ok those tool he had (so it is claimed) could have been for minor repairs but there was no evidence of him forging any other artifacts. There is a difference in cleaning up an artifact and forgery. The case against Golan was thrown out according to Wikipedia yet the article says it is "still pending", so it isn't up to date. Ancient Objects, Dubious Claims http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122446027022248721

Charon were you answering, with your sickle cell anaemia example, my post http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/85957-does-evolution-follow-the-scientific-method-if-so-how/page-6#entry838229 I could imagine if there were only two male members (plus females) of a species left if might be luck which of the two survive even if the better characteristics is liable to outperform his rival could well fall victim to predation. But in larger populations chance (what I called "luck") would tend to even itself out, sometimes you are lucky but then sometimes not. Whereas the general benefit of an advantage is progressively passed through the generations, unstoppable.

Can you give an example where luck appears to have been involved in meaningful way in the evolution of a species? For I tend to think luck is going to be evened out over a longer period of time. Luck isn't going to hold up all the time and in the end one with an advantage would generally be the winner. But if you have an example, I'll stand to be corrected.

Would you like to say what the Muslims teach?

OK I'll give you that one. "Now a rockslide kill 25 individuals, independent of their alleles." That does make it clear there was no selection advantage, but I'll be a Devil's Advocate and ask how was this determined that it was just random and independent in the first place? Think of the Chicxulub Meteor it wiped out a high percentage but some animals survived.

That was the point of wasting the day, to assess all the evidence presented. It was rare to have an ossuary with the extra phrase and "the brother of....". There had only been one other ossuary found with that phrase and it too was for someone's famous brother. My belief in Jesus was not dependent on the factualness of this ossuary. The names are not rare but to get that combination and order (person, father, famous brother) was calculated to be just 1 individual living at that time.

I see it now, you are using the word "dependent" based on whether the trait enabled survivability or not, and you are assuming none of the alleles improved survivability and therefore the result was "absolutely independent" of the alleles. The way I thought you wrote it means that the final gene frequency, post landslide, is dependent on what alleles were lost in the disaster. i.e. if they were all the one type and 25 of them perished that particular allele frequency is hit severely, in fact it could have completely wiped out that type. You have made an assumption there. Do you know if or how the alleles benefited the individuals? Just as a suggestion one allele might have given them better eyesight or hearing and they got out of harms way quicker and safer.

I just want to focus on this paragraph please. Did you mean independent or dependent? I think the gene frequency change is dependent on the alleles lost by the 25 killed individuals. Can you explain why you say "absolutely independent" please?

Another mistake in the Bible! What are you really trying to say?

Spent a day looking into the James ossuary. I would say it is certain it belonged to James the brother of Jesus, the famous Jesus mentioned in the gospels. Those that deny that have other devious agendas. You can't get much more direct evidence for prior existence for both of them. OK there are those people in that era that ended up as emperors and such like, with so much evidence that no one disputes their historicity, but for an itinerant charismatic preacher Jesus has done a remarkable job in leaving a legacy.

How do you feel about what this guy says? Adam and Eve were NOT first humans: Ahmed Kutty

What makes them make up their mind? Was it written in the incorrect language? Where did you see " that the ossuary still is not accepted by the majority of historians"? See what Wikipedia says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ossuary

It is just what you'd expect though isn't it? "James the son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." Fits in with history perfectly, and it is written in stone. You can still be an atheist and accept that the ossuary in fact belonged to "James the brother of Jesus". You already accepted that Jesus existed and James is known from more sources as well. So I assume you accept James, and Joseph, their father as a matter of history. No one is asking you to believe a virgin birth or a resurrection here, just a family connection.

It is quite interesting to describe the logistics of how the human population becomes lactose tolerant. I've been trying to workout the selective advantage aspect. Those that drunk milk got diarrhoea so didn't get the opportunities to mate. Or was it the ones who could handle milk as adults were better earners and had more kids hence their genes dominated. I could imagine in times of famine when milk might have the only source of nutrition lactose tolerance would be a critical factor. So the genes most probably would have been introduced from outside the community being studied here.

I think this is far too underrated.

The ossuary of james the Just the brother of Jesus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LncAZQ7-IOU

Those that study genetics of the human origins use terms like Genetic Adam and genetic Eve. They don't seem to be living at the same time.

Does the Quran mention Adam and Eve?

That is important to me as well. That is why I don't have that view. I believe Jesus died like all of us will.