home spirituality astrophysics and evolution math versus evolution

Math versus
The Theory of Evolution

Well, that was round one. Here's round two, and the fight does not seem to be balancing out. If we believe that mankind has been on this planet for tens of thousands of years, where are all the fossils? Why do we not find all these millions and millions of remains of anyone from more than several thousand years ago?

Okay, that's a side-issue, even if it is valid. Let's get back to the main subject: math. How does math shred the theory of evolution? In several ways, but here we will focus on one way: the population growth. The current population of the world is estimated at about 6,000,000,000 people in late 1999. Some call that number 6 billion, some say 6 thousand million.

According to the United Nations, person number 6,000,000,000 was born in the former Yugoslavia on October 11th, 1999.

The first table below shows what the earth's population would have been over the years if we had a constant rate of growth over the centuries, or millennia.

Scientists use statistics to prove a lot of things, like how many people will die in car accidents next year, how many will die this year from cancer, and such. While they do not know which individuals will die, because that is not predictable, they certainly come VERY close with these predictions. Because general behavior is predictable, even when individual is not.

Also, it is probably safe to assume that over the centuries and millennia, the growth rate has been close to constant. Yes, the world population grew slower during World War 2, but that is only a few years out of the century, and more than likely the 'baby boom' afterwards balanced the rate. Certainly there have been ups and downs in any one country, and things like the plaque and wars and devastations would have had their impact on a portion of the planet at any one time. But those are all short-term events, sometimes not even going a full decade.

What was the rate? Let's look at today. Now, experts assume the human population grows overall at somewhere between 1 and 3 percent every year. It depends on which one you listen to. What I want to show you is how math makes it IMPOSSIBLE for that whole range of numbers to have been our growth rate since the beginning of our presence here on earth.

As an example, let's ASSUME a growth rate of .375 percent every year, which is much lower than we now see. With 3/8ths of one percent increase in population every year, it will take 192 years for the population to double. (Investors are familiar with the 'rule of 72' which is what I used here. Divide 72 by the growth rate, and you get how many years to doubling your investment. Yes, an investment growing at 10% a year doubles in just over 7 years. One growing at 7.2% doubles in ten years!)

Using today's estimated population, and cutting it in half every 192 years, we get the following table, which ROUGHLY ESTIMATES when we had only the first 'man and wife'.

This tells us that, if the population growth rate has always been 3/8ths of one percent every year, then we started on this planet at about the year 4,144 B.C. This is just an example using the random number of 3/8th of one percent. But what if the average growth rate was actually higher? Or lower? Here's the numbers below, listing estimated growth rate, how many years at that growth rate it takes to double the population, and how far back at that growth rate, it takes us to get to the first couple, or "Year One" as I have named it. Remember that the estimates for today's growth rate are between 1 and 3%!

So, if we have had a growth rate of 4 percent every year, we would have started with just two humans in the year 1424 in order to get 6 thousand million people on this planet in 1999. I think we can forget that number as being the actual growth rate. We have proof of people on this planet before the year 1424, don't we? So I think we can safely say that human beings have not been growing at a steady 4%, the number MUST be lower.

How about the bottom number? At that very low growth rate, mankind doubled every 5 thousand 7 hundred and sixty years to get to where we are today. One would have to be crazy to take that as the real number, as that makes human parents very old when they have their first child! That's a crazy number. It doesn't take that long to have kids! So this number is WAY TOO LOW! Yet, it puts us on this planet as of only 182 thousand years ago. According to some evolutionists, we have been here much longer than 182 thousand years! So they want us to believe that we take even longer than about 5700 years to go from two humans to four humans. They want us to believe that it took over 11,000 years to go from two humans to eight humans on the planet.

Do they realize what they are saying? It is absurd to believe the population grew so slowly! Not just for a few years, but as an average overall!

Here's more new information. The United Nations, which just claimed we hit that big 6 thousand million, also says that the Earth's population has doubled since 1960. So if we have doubled in 39 years, then we are having a growth rate, right now, without major worlds-wide wars of just under 2%, or about 1.84% With that number, if it was averaged since we got here, we got started in about the year 700. Well, we haven't stayed at that level, either.

I believe that the growth rate has been higher than average lately because of the great victories over many diseases, and the great reduction of hunger (on a percentage basis) than ever before. People are living the longest we have known about for centuries, the infant mortality rate is at lows where medical help is available and generally speaking poverty and it's effects has been reduced, though not close to being eliminated. I am not saying life is perfect, I just say it is at a new high.

Here's more crazy information: A study at the University of California at Berkeley reports that according to their research of DNA, people started about 200,000 years ago in Africa. A similar study at Emory University in Atlanta says that we started about 140,000 years ago in Asia. Both cases are trying to say (through the statistics above, that it took over 5,500 years AT LEAST for the population to double, even though the current growth rate does it in 39 years.

Note: Both studies looked at cells called 'mitochondria' (sounds like the metachlorines of Star Wars, doesn't it?) that are inherited from the mother. In both cases, they were attempting to put a time table on evolution. Yet another case of if you start with a theory that is flawed, and try to make it fit your data instead of looking at your data scientifically, you may have results that are not accurate.

What is the answer? Well, it is certainly not the one they came up with! You may notice, that the original example I used came up with a date of about 4000 BC. I tend to like that number for several reasons, one of which is shown in my series of articles on "The Bible Timeline" on this site.