poptart, please settle a little debate we're having here...

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:40 pm

It's 107 degrees here so nobody's coming in and we're stuck talking with each other 'bout how to solve all the world's problems.

The usual.

Now, along the way way we started talking about how continents were formed and such and of course everything eventually led back to the Beginning, to Adam and Eve and, well, to you. (You're the only Fundamentalist I can think of at the moment so I still have you buzzing around in my melon...)

Anyway, bear with me here. Here goes...

We got ourselves some Adam. We got ourselves some Eve. Later, we got a sneaky little apple and a a talking snake.

Then, as a result, we got ourselves some serious begatting.

And so, we got ourselves those two little recalcitrant fuckers Cain and Abel.

So far, I'm with you here...

Now, okay...

:?

How did we get Bjork, Samuel L. Jackson and Mao Tse Tung from just the incestuous begatting of the Fun Family of Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel? See, I know how we're supposed to've migrated all across the various continents and such, but still, if there was nobody there when our intrepid travelers first arrived in Kamchatka and Malmo then how did we get funky looking eskimos and Swedes just from the incestuous couplings of the Original Fun Family?

I told my buddy here that Fundamentalists had some sort of explanation for this (monkey fucking, perchance??), and he says no way, genetics and chromosomes and all that say there couldn't possibly be one, so I told him to quit being such a cynical douche and to just wait until you sort it all out for us.

Our attention is rapt and the mic is now yours.

(Tom In VA, feel free to also chime in if the Rapture or Whatever should provide you with the answer there as well...)

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:55 pm

Are you asking for a Pigment Flow Chart?

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 7:00 pm

A simple Deviations From The Basic Laws Of Genetics lesson will suffice.

Stopping the earth from rotating on its axis, with no undue damage to said planet or its inhabitants, we'll leave that one for another day...

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 7:46 pm

Van wrote:A simple Deviations From The Basic Laws Of Genetics lesson will suffice.

Stopping the earth from rotating on its axis, with no undue damage to said planet or its inhabitants, we'll leave that one for another day...

Are you trying to say that the Earth's 1000 mph rotation would cause some problems were it to suddenly stop?

I think the fundies might need a little extra "Jesus Juice" to explain that one.

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:19 pm

Yeah, yeah, B, but I'm initially trying to deal in smaller and more manageable bites here. For now I'll settle for an explanation on how we got Mr T, Margaret Cho, Meg Ryan and Carrot Top outta one daughter-less fornicatin' family with only two sets of base DNA...

The Whistle Is Screaming · Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:21 pm

Original Sin, that's how. Read Genesis G-d Fucking Damnnit!

Signed,
'tart

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:23 pm

Easy...the dark ones are condemned to Hell.

--The Book of Mormon

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:55 pm

How did we get Bjork, Samuel L. Jackson and Mao Tse Tung from just the incestuous begatting of the Fun Family of Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel?

Bjork was hatched from the egg of a goose.
Mao Tse Tung Fell out of the belly of Budda
Samuel L. Jackson wasn't born asshole he just BECAME.

Spontaneous Generation, Motherfucker, do you speak it?

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:59 pm

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:Original Sin, that's how. Read Genesis G-d Fucking Damnnit!

Signed,
'tart

Wait a sec...

Original Sin is supposed to be why we no longer live forever. S'wot he said! We used to Live Eternal, but after da' bitch ate da' apple we started having normal lifespans as punishment for her fruit lovin' ass.

Now, how does this tie in with gene splicing??

ChargerMike · Post by **ChargerMike** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:30 pm

There is only one race inhabiting the planet, the human race. Some people think there must be different ‘races’ of people because there appear to be major differences between various groups, such as skin colour and eye shape.

The truth, though, is that these so-called ‘racial characteristics’ are only minor variations among the people groups. Scientists have found that if one were to take any two people from anywhere in the world, the basic genetic differences between these two people would typically be around 0.2 percent—even if they came from the same people group. But, these so-called ‘racial’ characteristics that many think are major differences (skin colour, eye shape, etc.) account for only 6 percent of this 0.2 percent variation, which amounts to a mere 0.012 percent difference genetically.

In other words, the so-called ‘racial’ differences are absolutely trivial. Overall, there is more variation within any group than there is between one group and another. If a white person is looking for a tissue match for an organ transplant, for instance, the best match may come from a black person, and vice versa. The ABC News science page stated, ‘What the facts show is that there are differences among us, but they stem from culture, not race.’ The only reason many people think these differences are major is because they’ve been brought up in a culture that has taught them to see the differences this way.

According to the Bible, all people on earth today descended from Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives, and before that from Adam and Eve (Gen. 1–11). The Bible tells us how the population that descended from Noah’s family had one language and were living together and disobeying God’s command to ‘fill the earth’ (Gen. 9:1; 11:4). God confused their language, causing a break-up of the population into smaller groups which scattered over the earth (Gen. 11:8–9).

Using modern genetics, it can be shown how, following such a break-up of a population, variations in skin colour, for example, can develop in only a few generations. And there is good evidence to show that the various groups of people we have today have not been separated for huge periods of time.

Clear?

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:33 pm

No, not clear.

Your genes and your wife's genes (assuming you're both caucasion) could never produce a child who looked like Manute Bol.

Skin pigments, facial structure, hair type...

Never gonna happen.

How did we get to Noah and his wives from just one family and the genes of only two people, Adam and Eve?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:54 pm

Van wrote:Yeah, yeah, B, but I'm initially trying to deal in smaller and more manageable bites here. For now I'll settle for an explanation on how we got Mr T, Margaret Cho, Meg Ryan and Carrot Top outta one daughter-less fornicatin' family with only two sets of base DNA...

Which also means we're all related.

Sweet.

Since I'm part of the family...can I borrow like $20?

ChargerMike · Post by **ChargerMike** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:59 pm

Van wrote:No, not clear.

Your genes and your wife's genes (assuming you're both caucasion) could never produce a child who looked like Manute Bol.

Skin pigments, facial structure, hair type...

Never gonna happen.

How did we get to Noah and his wives from just one family and the genes of only two people, Adam and Eve?

"God confused their language, causing a break-up of the population into smaller groups which scattered over the earth (Gen. 11:8–9).

Using modern genetics, it can be shown how, following such a break-up of a population, variations in skin colour, for example, can develop in only a few generations. And there is good evidence to show that the various groups of people we have today have not been separated for huge periods of time."

...of course if you take God out of the equation, you're left with a dilemma. If however, you accept the concept "with God, all things are possible" you're clear!

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:13 pm

Merely confusing one's language won't allow only four people who are all blood related from only two sets of DNA to create the entire rainbow of humanity.

You keep mentioning "populations". Remember, we're only talking four people here: Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel.

Who fucked who, to get the next set of people? I'm guessing Eve must've eaten more than just an apple...

Even so, their incestuous offspring could've never had the variety of DNA necessary to create all of current humanity. They could've created a bunch of British Royalty and a bunch of really excellent washboard, milk bottle and fiddle players and not much else...

Of course we can't remove God from the equation here so I'm asking poptart to give me the bible's description of how we went from just four people to "populations"....

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:13 pm

Van wrote:It's 107 degrees ......
:?

How did we get Bjork, Samuel L. Jackson and Mao Tse Tung from just the incestuous begatting of the Fun Family of Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel? See, I know how we're supposed to've migrated all across the various continents and such, but still, if there was nobody there when our intrepid travelers first arrived in Kamchatka and Malmo then how did we get funky looking eskimos and Swedes just from the incestuous couplings of the Original Fun Family?

I told my buddy here that Fundamentalists had some sort of explanation for this (monkey fucking, perchance??), and he says no way, genetics and chromosomes and all that say there couldn't possibly be one, so I told him to quit being such a cynical douche and to just wait until you sort it all out for us.

Our attention is rapt and the mic is now yours.

(Tom In VA, feel free to also chime in if the Rapture or Whatever should provide you with the answer there as well...)

Take off all of your clothes and spend a week outside in 107 degree weather. Do not go inside, eat whatever you can find.

You will notice that you look different. Now imagine staying outside naked for the next 40 years.. You will look wicked different.

Have your grandchildren and great grandchildren walk to Alaska naked and eating only what they find along the way.. Tell them only to have sex with each other. No Monkey Fucking, No Shepp Fucking, etc..When they get cold,. Tell them to wear the old carcass of a dead animal on them. In 200 years, tell half of them to travel across the ocean to Russia, Keep sending half of whoever is still alive to various parts of the globe. Finally in 2000 years, Have everyone get together in Ohio.

I will bet you, YOUR ancestors will look like the children below. Except the fact that they will still be humans.

Now, Imagine all that naked traveling happening over 10,000 years...!!

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:16 pm

Jack, now imagine having to fuck your own children in order to create progeny that could walk the ends of the earth...

Btw, none of those people in your picture could create offspring that look like Ed "Too Tall" Jones...

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:31 pm

Jack wrote: I will bet you, YOUR ancestors will look like the children below. Except the fact that they will still be humans.

I imagine after all that cousin fuckin they'd be more like this:

or this:

Terry in Crapchester · Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:37 pm

Van, to answer a few of your questions . . .

In fairness, the Bible does mention a third son of Adam and Eve: Seth. My understanding is that the fundies claim that Adam and Eve had other children not mentioned in the Bible. Seems to me that fundies want a literal interpretation when that suits their interests (e.g., when fighting against the teaching of evolution), but not when it doesn't suit their interests.

As to the different races, again I understand that some fundies interpret this passage to explain the origins of the black race:

And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.
9:19 These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.
9:20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
9:21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
9:23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.
9:24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
9:25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
9:26 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
9:27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

But all it mentions is that Canaan would be a servant. Again, implying that the Africans were the descendents of Ham requires a leap that a literal reading of Genesis cannot provide.

I don't agree with any of this, but I'm telling you where they get it from, at least as I understand it.

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:41 pm

Terry, even a possible third Son, Seth, well, it doesn't change the genetics equation any.

One "gene pure" Adam, one "gene pure" Eve, and their three sons.

No daughters, even.

Also, you still have to get to Ham, or Noah, and how does that happen from only a family of five?

Terry in Crapchester · Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:43 pm

I'm not disputing your argument, but you missed this point:

My understanding is that the fundies claim that Adam and Eve had other children not mentioned in the Bible.

Like I said, the fundies are quite inconsistent in terms of how they argue the Bible should be interpreted.

ChargerMike · Post by **ChargerMike** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:45 pm

Van wrote:Merely confusing one's language won't allow only four people who are all blood related from only two sets of DNA to create the entire rainbow of humanity.

You keep mentioning "populations". Remember, we're only talking four people here: Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel.

Who fucked who, to get the next set of people? I'm guessing Eve must've eaten more than just an apple...

Even so, their incestuous offspring could've never had the variety of DNA necessary to create all of current humanity. They could've created a bunch of British Royalty and a bunch of really excellent washboard, milk bottle and fiddle players and not much else...

Of course we can't remove God from the equation here so I'm asking poptart to give me the bible's description of how we went from just four people to "populations"....

...I can't give you Tart's explanation, I can point that it didn't begin with "only four people". Adam and Eve had other children, and those children did marry their brothers and sisters.

Start with 4X4 and multiply the answer out 10 times. Adds up pretty fast!

He and Eve had three children named in Genesis: Cain, Abel, and Seth. The Book of Jubilees names two of his daughters: Azura, who married her brother Seth, and Awan, who married her brother Cain. Both Genesis and Book of Jubilees state that Adam had other children, but those other children are unnamed.

Terry in Crapchester · Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:52 pm

However, the Book of Jubilees never made it into our Bible, or the Jewish Torah, and it would appear that the author took quite a few liberties in writing it. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08535a.htm

ChargerMike · Post by **ChargerMike** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:57 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote:However, the Book of Jubilees never made it into our Bible, or the Jewish Torah, and it would appear that the author took quite a few liberties in writing it. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08535a.htm

...concur

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:03 am

Van wrote:Yeah, yeah, B, but I'm initially trying to deal in smaller and more manageable bites here. For now I'll settle for an explanation on how we got Mr T, Margaret Cho, Meg Ryan and Carrot Top outta one daughter-less fornicatin' family with only two sets of base DNA...

Make that one set.

Dumbass.

DiT · Post by **DiT** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:13 am

Adam and Eve had other children, and those children did marry their brothers and sisters.

Rack Adam and Eve!

Sin,
Arkysaw

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:14 am

Terry in Crapchester wrote:I'm not disputing your argument, but you missed this point:

My understanding is that the fundies claim that Adam and Eve had other children not mentioned in the Bible.
Like I said, the fundies are quite inconsistent in terms of how they argue the Bible should be interpreted.

I already addressed that. Other children from the same two parents won't change a thing, other than giving the sons more sisters to screw...

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:15 am

Diogenes wrote:
Van wrote:Yeah, yeah, B, but I'm initially trying to deal in smaller and more manageable bites here. For now I'll settle for an explanation on how we got Mr T, Margaret Cho, Meg Ryan and Carrot Top outta one daughter-less fornicatin' family with only two sets of base DNA...
Make that one set.

Dumbass.

Well, true. One set, comprised of two people. I stand corrected.

Feel better?

Jeez, what a cunt...

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:20 am

No, one set as in Eve's DNA was the same as Adam's with an extra X in place of the Y chromosome.

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:43 am

Mister Bushice wrote:
Jack wrote:
I imagine after all that cousin fuckin they'd be more like this:

or this:

THe Problem with the Cousing Fucking Problem that you mention is :
You are starting at what we currently look like and think like...

It's possible that we looked different when there were only 2 living beings that begat 4 and begat 16 and begat 32....

That may explain why we only use 10% of our brains...

Perhaps this was Adam and Eve..

There were NO people on the earth before Adam and Eve.
ALL people are descended from the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve...

Accordingly, it is clear that Cain married one of his sisters, or he married the daughter of one of his sisters (his cousin) or he had sex with his mother (which makes more sense since noone mentions any more kids from Adam and Eve.

Nowadays we use the word incest to refer to the marriage of close relatives.

and then again, if you believe the Bible version, You cannot forget NOAH..

Everyone died except Noah and his clan (and the animals). The Ark ended up on Mount Ararat (former Armenia.. before the Turks exterminated most of the Armenians..another thread for another day).

So, we are all descendants of Noah and his gang...

Once Noah had seen all the animals off, he then had to set about repopulating the world. Again, incest in the bible rears it's ugly head. Noah's family had to inbreed to have children. Sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, first cousins and first cousins (as Noah's sons had their wives with them - eight people altogether) all nicely mixed together..

Who knows what Noah and his clan really looked like... but we are what resulted from the incest in Noah's family.

This could have been Noah!!

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:27 am

Diogenes wrote:No, one set as in Eve's DNA was the same as Adam's with an extra X in place of the Y chromosome.

And any of this adds any substance whatever to this discussion, how?

Bottom line, we're still talking only about Adam and Eve here. Two people, period, neither of whom have any mixed blood whatsoever. Wherever you wish to locate this mythical Garden Of Eden, whether it be in Africa or the middle east, it would still be impossible for just those two people and their offspring to ever see their family's DNA branch off to such an extent that both Heidi Klum and William Perry could be their result of their migrating offspring.

No matter how much incest, walking the land and language changing might've gone on there, nope, it's not going to happen. All you'd get is a higher count of fucked up inbreds. You wouldn't suddenly see tall, towheaded, blue eyed Nordic looking kids popping out on one side of the globe followed by short, squat, almond eyed dark haired kids popping out on another side of the globe.

You sure as hell wouldn't see Shaq popping out of this family either, much less Noah and his family and Ham and his family.

Speaking of which, may we also discuss the Fundamentalist's defense of the existence of Noah's fabled Arc?? I'm to believe that Noah managed to corral two of every creature on earth and then he penned them all up in one single wooden boat?

:)

In the absence of Bill Cosby he managed this, how? He kept them in one non central heating/air conditioning havin' boat, with no fatalities along the way, how?

We can't even manage to sardine illegal immigrants in ship containers without losing literally boatloads of 'em en route, but a guy from the middle east like Noah managed to scrounge up a male and female polar bear, penguin, giraffe, hippo, elephant, kangaroo, Siberian tiger and monitor lizard and get 'em all to all safely co-exist for a month and half out at sea in one single wooden boat...the size of which would've had to've exceeded by ten times anything that ever existed in that world at that time. Then, once he stuck his hand outside and decided it wasn't going to rain anymore he just decided to pull over, open up the hatches and...let 'em all loose!

And they didn't all freak out, eat each other, immediately die from exposure and all the other things that would instantly conspire to kill off such disparate animal types that found themselves in such a ridiculous scenario...

Like the little kid whose pet lobster has grown too big for its tank, Noah just took the little feller out to the forest and let him loose...

That was how it went down, eh?

Oh really.

:D

poptart?

Shawn Marion · Post by **Shawn Marion** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:36 am

In regards to one set of DNA...

That DNA would still have 2 sets of genes for each characteristic. No where does it say that Adam's genes were pure or all homogeneous.

Adam could have had 1 gene for blue eyes and one gene for brown eyes. Likewise for skin, hair, height, and everything else in the body.

Considering they are supposed to have a mess of kids, this would allow for a fair share of diverseness once you get a generation or two removed from adam and eve.

Now, this doesn't explain differences between all races; but just because there was only one set of DNA does not mean there would be a complete lack of diversity.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:37 am

TWIS wrote:Original Sin, that's how. Read Genesis G-d Fucking Damnnit!

Signed,
'tart

RACK TWIS for getting to the BOTTOM bottom line.

But anyway ......

Van,

ChargerMike has answered things pretty well.

Noah's kids began the population of the earth as we know it today.
The tower of Babel incident was the spark that sent folks scattering all over the world.
God confouded the language of the people and as they moved to new places they began to use a different language.
Naturally, people of a like-language would relate to each other and trust in each other.
People naturally then got their freak on with the opposite sex within their OWN LANGUAGE GROUP AND WORLD LOCALE.
Hence, different skin tones, hair colors, eye colors, and other 'features' easily passed along to following generations.
Envirornmental factors played into things in as much as darkening or lightening skin pigment (etc) over a period of time.
This is how the 'races' developed.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:46 am

Shawn Marion wrote:In regards to one set of DNA...

That DNA would still have 2 sets of genes for each characteristic. No where does it say that Adam's genes were pure or all homogeneous.

Adam could have had 1 gene for blue eyes and one gene for brown eyes. Likewise for skin, hair, height, and everything else in the body.

Considering they are supposed to have a mess of kids, this would allow for a fair share of diverseness once you get a generation or two removed from adam and eve.

Now, this doesn't explain differences between all races; but just because there was only one set of DNA does not mean there would be a complete lack of diversity.

Those would have to be some mighty diverse genes to produce both Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

Nope. Not gonna happen.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:49 am

Despite appearances, there is not much difference between those two folks (or ANY two folks), Van

Shawn Marion · Post by **Shawn Marion** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:52 am

Van wrote:
Those would have to be some mighty diverse genes to produce both Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

Nope. Not gonna happen.

Actually, if Adam was half African - half Asian it could explain Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

It wouldn't be able to explain Mutumbo, Yamaguchi, and Carrot Top though.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:25 am

Van,

ChargerMike has answered things pretty well.

He didn't answer them at all. His explanation of "Original Sin" was already used by you to describe man's punishment for eating the apple; punishment which involved the curse of mortality, not crazy and copious incest that would lead to impossible gene combinations.

Noah's kids began the population of the earth as we know it today.

Noah's kids?

How did we come to have disparate racial mixes from Noah's kids, if they themselves were descended from Adam and Eve?

You still have to take one man and one woman and have them and their children fuck each other like bunnies in order to populate the world.

So, first off, we're to believe that our race was founded on out of control incest.

Sweet.

Next, you still have to contend with the simple fact that all that incest wouldn't create our current multitude of disparate humanity. You'd just get a lot of fucked up but similar looking inbreds. See, it's not like Cain and Abel had cars, boats and planes. No, all they had was Eve to fuck, to give them children. Once they fucked Eve they had some new kids of their own (which the bible conveniently fails to mention) but they still live in pretty much the same neighborhood.

All they had was foot travel back then and those guys couldn't have gone very far.

So, they just kept fucking their kids and the kids kept fucking each other and their parents and...

...and that's it. That's all that could've happened. You'd get a bunch of genetic inbreds who have no other means to introduce new genes into their little cesspool. They could travel by foot all they wanted to but no matter where they went all they'd find was a whole bunch of nuthin' 'cause they were IT in terms of people on the planet.

Wherever they'd drop anchor, there they'd drop the hammer on each other.

This will not create much of anything in terms of a disparate human race. Noah's family couldn't have been anything but more of the same so it doesn't matter that everybody but Noah and his family were killed during the flood. Once the skies cleared the gene poll would still be nothing but A&E's incestuous progeny.

The tower of Babel incident was the spark that sent folks scattering all over the world.

Scatter 'em all you want. No matter where they were scattered, that was it. There there then found themselves, alone. T'were just them and their incestuous family, same as it ever were.

There was still no way to create LaQueefa And Her Junk and Inga The Swedish Bikini Model from that fucked up gene pool.

You're describing how people got scattered all over the world but that still doesn't answer the racial question of how one set of two DNAs came to create the entirety of mankind.

God confouded the language of the people and as they moved to new places they began to use a different language.

They could use whatever language they wanted. Wouldn't matter. Wherever they went they'd still only be talking and hooking back up with their own family, with everybody still sharing the same incestuous bloodline.

The language point is a complete non sequitur.

Naturally, people of a like-language would relate to each other and trust in each other.

If Hilda and Sven speak different languages but are of the exact same Nordic family bloodlines their children still won't look anything like Mike Tyson no matter how many times they can't understand each other.

People naturally then got their freak on with the opposite sex within their OWN LANGUAGE GROUP AND WORLD LOCALE.

And within their own A&E derived family too, in this scenario.

Hence, different skin tones, hair colors, eye colors, and other 'features' easily passed along to following generations.

Hence, they'd still all have the exact same skin tones, hair colors, eye colors and other "features" that were characteristic of A&E...and nothing else.

Moreover, with that much incest going on combined with no new blood being injected into the mix the species probably dies off long before it ever gets to this point.

Envirornmental factors played into things in as much as darkening or lightening skin pigment (etc) over a period of time.

If you moved Donnie & Marie Osmond to Uganda and had them fuck each other and produce offspring and then had their offspring fuck nothing but each other, over and over and over...you'd still end up with straight haired, big toofered milquetoast motherfuckers who are no closer than they are now to having afros, wide noses, large lips and flat faces.

They'd eventually get darker but unless somebody started sneaking out and getting their freak on with the hired help that'd be it.

This is how the 'races' developed.

Either that, or it was down to evolution.

Hmmm, I'll have to continue mulling over the plausibility of each theory...

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:28 am

poptart wrote:Despite appearances, there is not much difference between those two folks (or ANY two folks), Van

There's no such thing in this case as "despite appearances".

Appearances mean everything here when they're differences that are only possible through specific differing DNA; DNA that physically cannot occur, according to a literal interpretation of the bible.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:31 am

Shawn Marion wrote:
Van wrote:
Those would have to be some mighty diverse genes to produce both Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

Nope. Not gonna happen.
Actually, if Adam was half African - half Asian it could explain Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

It wouldn't be able to explain Mutumbo, Yamaguchi, and Carrot Top though.

You're forgetting about that slut Eve. Maybe she was half Cradle Of Earthian and half Tard.

We know she was All Slut though, sinc she apparantly fucked the bejeezus out of her own children.

Exactly why does Christianity look down on incest anyway, since their entire existence is apparently founded on it?

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:33 am

Shawn Marion wrote:
Van wrote:
Those would have to be some mighty diverse genes to produce both Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

Nope. Not gonna happen.
Actually, if Adam was half African - half Asian it could explain Kristi Yamaguchi and Dikembe Mutumbo.

It wouldn't be able to explain Mutumbo, Yamaguchi, and Carrot Top though.

You're forgetting about that slut Eve. Maybe she was half Cradle Of Earthian and half Tard.

We know she was All Slut though, since she apparantly fucked the bejeezus out of anything that moved, even including her own children.

Exactly why does Christianity look down on incest anyway, since their very existence is apparently founded on it?

Shawn Marion · Post by **Shawn Marion** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:39 am

Van wrote:You're forgetting about that slut Eve. Maybe she was half Cradle Of Earthian and half Tard.

We know she was All Slut though, since she apparantly fucked the bejeezus out of anything that moved, even including her own children.

Exactly why does Christianity look down on incest anyway, since their very existence is apparently founded on it?

I was going under the presumption that Eve had the same DNA as Adam since she was supposedly created with his rib.

T1B

poptart, please settle a little debate we're having here...

poptart, please settle a little debate we're having here...

Re: poptart, please settle a little debate we're having here

Re: poptart, please settle a little debate we're having here

Re: poptart, please settle a little debate we're having here