Talk:Noah

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search
! This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Religion-related articles on Conservapedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Conservlogo.png

Contents

Clean vs. unclean

Ok, so for a site that puts forward the truth of biblical scripture, I would have thought that there wouldn't be a mistake on the animals on the Ark. The article says two clean and seven clean, surely it says clean and unclean. At least it does in my bible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Addeter (talk)

Link to homo sapiens

I undid the recent change creating a link for "people" by directing it to "homo sapiens". Based on Creationist thinking, other groups such as Neanderthals are usually considered to have been humans in the tough post flood environment. Also, I believe links are supposed to be germaine to the article. A link giving a definition of people is not germaine to an understanding of Noah. Thanks Learn together 16:28, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

Too short!

The article seems far too short. For example, it doesn't say what Noah's side of the covenat with God was, and nor does it describe the nature of the curse placed on Canaan. The article on Wikipedia is much more complete - couldn't it be used here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PiCo (talk)

No :) We don't use wikipedia articles in that way. Many hands make light work, however, and you should feel free to expand it constructively :) File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 13:43, 26 June 2007 (EDT)

races

Question - If there was a recent creation followed by a flood that killed all but Noahs family, how did races evolve? Like Asians, Africans etc etc? I will post this on YEC talk also. AdenJ 01:58, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

See here. Philip J. Rayment 02:24, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
This was a good article to read. I wish I could show it to my grandmother, who has repeatedly tried to convince me that black people suffer from the curse of Ham. DanH 02:30, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
Why can't you? (Or is that a private matter?) Just print it out and give it to her. Philip J. Rayment 02:38, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
I've tried to speak with her, and even discussed the matter of Rahab and Boaz with her, but she dismisses what I say because I am younger and simply says that I am not reading my Bible closely enough. Perhaps printing off the article would be a good idea. DanH 02:43, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
A very interesting paper Phillip but it is mistaken about genetics of melanin. I am unsure if this was to simplify the paper or not but it is much more complicated than the paper lets on. For instance there are two types of melanin, phelomelanin and eumelanin. One gives a reddish hue while the other gives a dark brown hue. This is important since the amount of melanin is encoded on six genes, not two as the paper presents; it is also controlled by several alleles allowing for great variance to the possible hues. This is all greatly complicated by the fact that the genes for melanin are neither dominant nor recessive allowing for incomplete dominance, thus allowing for shades within a color. The comment about the epicanthic fold is really a stretch, it is genetic in nature and not caused by more fat. There is an actual physiological difference in the eye lid to cause the fold. I must say the article is correct in its assumption of how melanogenesis affects the coloring of skin. We all have a basal level of melanin and an activated level. The basal level is what determines race while the active level is based on UV exposure. Both the active and basal levels are dictated genetically. Just my two cents.--Able806 09:22, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
From the link that you apparently read only superficially:
We know that skin colour is governed by more than one pair of genes. For simplicity, let’s assume there are only two,9...
At position A we could have a pair such as MAMA,, MAmA or mAmA11...
If three gene pairs were involved, seven levels of melanin would be possible. ...
We need to remember, of course, that the way in which genes express themselves is much more complex than this simplified picture. For example, sometimes certain genes are linked together. However, the basic point is unaffected.
9. This simplification is not done to help our case—the more genes there are, the easier it is to have a huge range of ‘different’ colours. The principle involved can be understood by using two as an example.
11. For the technically minded, this type of genetic expression, where allele dosage affects the trait, is called partial dominance.
Philip J. Rayment 10:27, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
Thank you for pointing that out I thought I had missed something for it seemed a little to simplistic.--Able806 15:53, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
Personal tools