Model of Origins

Model of Origins

I have been asked what my opinion is, regarding origins. I'm a vocal critic of ancient earth common descent, so some are curious what my leanings are, regarding origins.

I present this as a model, that fits with the current evidence. My model can change (and has!), as better data becomes available. I am not dogmatic, but see this model as the most likely, given the physical evidence. Scientific minded people have to be open to possibility, and not lock themselves in dogmatic belief.

I also have the luxury of inside information, regarding a very important factor in this quest for understanding our origins. I met the Creator, and can take His creative power into account. When i was an atheist, i denied the Ability of a Creator, and assumed godless naturalism. But knowing there is a Supreme Being, Who hath wrought all things, my quest can concern itself with HOW, God accomplished this feat of creation.

Most people, who attended State run Indoctrination centers (like i did), have a limited, biased slant, regarding origins. It is a very difficult thing, to question Authority and the status quo, especially now. I was fortunate to be in the waning moments of a classical liberal education, where critical thinking and skepticism were emphasized. Mandated conformity of belief was not emphasized, in my day, as it is now.

So.. now, the model, and the facts that support it. I won't overwhelm the thread with every minutia of data, but summarize. Other threads can be used to examine the science behind individual points, and scrutinize detail.

There Exists a Creator
HOW He did this thing, is my goal of inquiry.

Age of the Earth
This is a foundational element, in any model. I was spoon fed ancient dates, of millions and billions of years, and assumed there was valid science behind those assumptions. But as i examined the evidence more critically, i could see many problems with the ancient earth assumptions. The formation of fossils, oil, coal, canyons, etc, did not require 'millions and billions!' of years, but could have happened rapidly. Isotope dating is fraught with unrealistic assumptions, and the helium isotopes in the atmosphere, as well as the magnetic half life of the earth, indicate a MUCH shorter time frame. I now see a time frame of 10k yrs or so as most likely. The entire universe was created, 'ex nihilo', fully functional, with the earth able to support life.

Age of Man
The discovery of mtDNA, and especially the matrilineal Most Recent Common Ancestor (mt-MRCA) has revolutionized the beliefs about man's origins. Neanderthal is now known to be just another human tribe, descended from the mt-MRCA, like all of us. The mitochondrial clock has been measured, using Russian Romanovs, Swedish kings, and others. The dates arrived at were extrapolated backward, following the mutation rate they were able to calculate, and the time to the mt-MRCA was discovered to be ~ 6k years. That fits with other data, even though it flies in the face of the majority belief of ancient dates.

Common Ancestry?
No. Every family/genera/phylogenetic type of organism appear suddenly, fully formed and developed, and then varied from there. All living things were created less than 10k yrs ago, and varied within their genetic parameters as they spread across the planet. There is no evidence of universal common descent, and plenty of evidence against it. It is a competing religious belief, in the progressive religion, that is based on the assumption of atheistic naturalism.

To summarize my current perception of the facts, and the model of origins:

1. God created the universe, in a 'big bang' creation event.. ~10k yrs ago
2. All living things were created soon after, including man. They have remained in their individual genetic states (with some variability), inviolate.
3. Fossils, oil, coal, canyons, etc, were formed in a short time frame, thousands (not millions) of years in the past. They were formed primarily from cataclysmic events, that seem to be uniformly spread across the globe.

I will be happy to clarify, or provide further detail, for this model, and offer critiques for conflicting models, if there is interest. I am not interested in a flame war with intolerant religious bigots, who demand conformity with THEIR indoctrinated beliefs. I have studied this subject for decades, am conversant with much of the technical language, and can see through assumptions, conjecture, and assertions. Bullying and intimidation will not change my perceptions of the scientific facts, nor do they refute the reasoning and methodology behind this model.