[continued from previous message]   
      
   > > correct then you would know what technology was used.   
   >   
   > That was simply the method used to determine the minimum   
   > number necessary. That determination was a modern act, not   
   > one made thousands of years in the past.   
   >   
   > Genetic analysis was the basic technique, as the quotation   
   > indicated.   
      
   Then why make the rule of. Definition that cannot stand the depth of time?   
   Why make such blanket statements and then argue to support them without   
   thinking and rationalizing the real situations? But thanks for actually   
   thinking about it.   
      
   >   
   >   
   > >   
   > > If you can’t cash the check, then say so.   
   > > >   
   > > >   
   > > > > *************************************   
   > > > > > > > depending on factors like genetic   
   > > > > > > > diversity, technological intervention, and time scale. The   
   > > > > > > > 50/500 rule, developed for biological populations,   
   > > > > > > > *************************************   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > That is where inbreeding and genetic   
   > > > > > > > > > diseases come from.   
   > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > But tell us: How could the   
   > > > > > > > > > Noah family reproduce itself   
   > > > > > > > > > without a WHOLE lot of incest   
   > > > > > > > > > going on?   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > The same factors as existed with the   
   > > > > > > > > children of Adam. At that time there   
   > > > > > > > > was genetic purity, no defects.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > And the same problems existed, which is an excellent   
   > > > > > > > argument against that legend being a myth.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)