Re: Fox News/Daily Mail version headline
"Please do the second calculation I proposed. Let us then discuss what is plausible."
As explained if I did the second calculation you proposed then it would not be plausible that things on the planet would exists as they do by that mechanism.
Fortunately I also explained why that is not like the mechanism that is actually proposed by evolution. Hence why I called it a strawman. Hence why I dismiss it. Because it's nonsense.
"Now we know that not every child reproduced nor in the same uniform amount. But we also know that families generally has been much larger that that family over the history. So it compensates to a large amount for the lost children. Now if each generation would only reproduce at a age of 200, 3 kids that would reproduce at the age of 200 additional 3 kids. It would only take 11400 years to reach 7 billion people."
So if we ignore all the things that tend to kill people before they breed and assume perfect exponential growth we can get to 7 billion people earlier. If we don't then we have to wait until medical technology and food resource technology improve enough to allow such growth. And if we look at population trends then what do you know? When these technologies improved the population growth exploded! It's almost as if there's some sort of, I don't know, causal link or something.
I don't really understand why you expect me to just ignore important components of a calculation just so it'll fit your argument but it's not going to happen.
"That we are a result of neandertals etc that lived so long ago simply don't fit real science. "
No it doesn't but then I doubt you understand the point of "the tree of life". Not the one in the fictional garden mind.
"And i did refer to legends of non Jewish myths, true enough the story is found in the abrahamic religions to. But its by far not unique to them. I doubt that the people in Hawai had anything to do with christians or jews at all, or those in australia or in canada, etc etc."
Yeah, because when people who don't even know how to calculate the size of the Earth have a myth of a "great flood", where floods occur all over the world for a variety of reasons, we should just assume that they weren't actually ignorant of the things they were most likely ignorant and instead assume a global deluge and ignore what we have subsequently discovered. Sounds reasonable to me!
You know many cultures also have myths about storms, lightning, earthquakes, volcanic erruptions and so forth right? Am I supposed to conclude anything other than these people experienced things we know have happened and continue to happen to people living on this rock? No? I just take at face value their explanations that they'd angried up the volcano gods as well because they didn't sacrafice enough people or kill the left handers? Ok then: sounds perfectly reasonable.