Is it possible to rationally believe YEC?

Quickly, one other thing:

I think that’s a really good point.


Also you need to discuss the damage YEC causes. YEC isn’t science and YEC degrades scientists who spend a lifetime doing research and making key discoveries only to be labeled “atheist evolutionists” by YECs. YEC causes damage to society by casting doubt on the motivation of scientists. It is one thing to be skeptical of the latest results of cutting edge scientific results but wrong to think that there is an atheistic science conspiracy to go against the “Word of God”.


None of those explanations is necessary.

At the risk of oversimplifying, the Chromosome 2 fusion can viewed as just one of the mutations that have become fixed in our lineage since some time after the split from chimpanzees. The fusion itself could even have originated earlier than the split.

It could have been fixed before GAE, or after. And GAE could have had the fusion, or not. Any of those scenarios could be compatible with GAE.

That’s my understanding as a non-population geneticist, anyway. Hope I’m not misleading you.


That’s correct @Faizal_Ali. This is equivalent to musing about Jesus’ genome, as there is no theological guidance or scientific evidence if we are to affirm the Virgin Birth.

1 Like

Still not getting your point. Why would Adam be created to be different from other humans? Why would you expect him to be created with unfused chromosomes as in other apes, rather than fused chromosomes as in humans? What would be the point?

Of course characters like that are evidence of common descent. But so are chins, thumbs, GULO pseudogenes, and C in position 832 of the mitochondrial cytocrome b gene. So what? If Adam was created to resemble other humans, it would take a special purpose for him to be different, not for him to be the same.

And yes, the only reason to believe that God created Adam and Eve de novo is that scripture says so. There couldn’t even in principle be any evidence for it.


To that end I started such a thread as you requested.

Here is the thread:

Visualization/Animation of Objections to Old Age Geological Column


First of all, humans aren’t computers. It is normal for humans to hold beliefs that are not supported by evidence. It is also normal for humans to hold false beliefs, or just be wrong. It is also normal for humans to hold faith-based beliefs. Can humans think irrationally? Yep, we sure can, me included.

One way I approach this topic is to ask “What would it take to change your mind?”. There are two main questions I have asked over the years:

  1. What features would a fossil need in order for you to accept it as evidence for humans and chimps sharing a common ancestor?

  2. What features would a geologic formation need in order to evidence a lack of a recent global flood and an old Earth?

If people aren’t able to answer these questions it tells me that they are either ignorant of the science (which is perfectly fine) or they didn’t reach their current position by using reason and evidence.


I was under the impression that the “H” in “Jesus H. Christ” stood for “haploid.”


6 posts were split to a new topic: Etymology of “Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick”

Let’s back up. Is C2f evidence for common descent? Maybe what you want to say is “No, it’s underdetermined.”

It is evidence for common descent. However, the “God just did it that way” ad hoc excuse is always available. This is a good illustration of the difference between “rational” and “reasonable.” Adopt the ad hoc postulate, and the system becomes rational, but not reasonable.

I’m not sure how you mean that.

Its existence was predicted before it was possible to actually determine its existence because we know we share common ancestry with other great apes. That’s a pretty strong indicator that common descent is true. But it would not be possible to determine common ancestry just from the fact that one of our chromosomes has telomeric remnants along one of its arms.

1 Like

You’re shifting between evidence and something being determinative. Can you answer the question about whether C2f is evidence?

Of course it is. But if Adam was created as human, he would logically have possessed the genetics of a human. You would need an extra explanation in order for him to have chimpanzee genetics. What could that explanation possibly be?

Not at all. It seems you did not understand my comment. What I was trying to convey was that, from the knowledge that we share common descent in just the last few million years with the other great apes, and also that we had one fewer chromosome pair than the others, it was known that there had to have been a fusion of two chromosomes in our genome. Then, when the technology became available to actually find the fusion site, there it was.

IOW the knowledge that common ancestry was true allowed a prediction to be made regarding what would be found when our genome was sequenced.

It is up to you to decide if this is the sort of thing you are referring to when as if C2f can be considered evidence for common ancestry. I don’t really know what you are getting at so I don’t want to answer on your behalf.

Yes. An important part of Joshua’s scenario is that Adam and Eve would have been interfertile with the other humans alive at the same time outside the Garden of Eden. That by itself does not tell us whether they would have had 48 or 46 chromosomes.

Of course. But why, if you’re specially creating a human, would you give him random atavisms? It makes no sense.

@swamidass can answer for himself, but I think he has a rather expansive concept of the term “human” in this context. I do not believe he is necessarily using it in a biological sense.

1 Like

How is that in any way relevant to what we’re talking about here?

No. I hadn’t read the entire thread. No disrespect was intended.

As with most communities of old friends (and new friends and some vague acquaintances) assessing motives can get tricky. Tangents arise at times, especially when a thread passes the hundred count. That’s why we have great moderators like @Dan_Eastwood who divide/start new threads.

1 Like