What is the mechanism to stop "kinds"from turning into other "kinds"?

[Justatruthseeker]

Yes, yes, but you accept adaptation do you not? So what is the barrier that prevents a species from eventually becoming something that we would classify as a different species?

Sure I accept adaptation. If you take a billion black rabbits and place them near the north pole. Those that survive will eventually become white rabbits. But they will still be rabbits. Now you may wish to call this white rabbit a new species, but it is not. It may even be a different size, such as a Mastiff and [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]zu, but they will still remain the same species. Granted I understand some in confusion having never seen dogs lets say, might incorrectly classify them as separate species. Even if we know they would be wrong to do so.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

...

What?

So you're suggesting there is no genetic variation in various populations of humans? That all 'Asians' are the same? And all Africans?

Do you know how genetics works?

Oh I understand there is variation within the subspecies, yet all Asians are Asian. All Africans African. See if you can comprehend the difference. There is no variation in the species until two subspecies mate. Its all you have ever observed, so why make claims it happened differently in the past where no one was around to make observations?

Must I keep saying it before you understand. Neither evolved into the Afro-Asian.

 

[pitabread]

Oh I understand there is variation within the subspecies, yet all Asians are Asian. All Africans African.

Let's explore this a little further: When you claim there is "variation within the subspecies", what exactly are you referring to? What is this variation specifically?

There is no variation in the species until two subspecies mate.

Which seems a blatant contradiction based on your previous point quoted above.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

"Fake news" became well known this year (regardless who came up with the term).
"Spin" is what it was called a century ago until recently.
Perhaps several or many other terms also.
This is the bain of mankind/ society,
and won't stop until Jesus returns.

i.e. society is wicked, and keeps coming up with "Fake news" for any number of reasons,
or even for no reason at all.

Truth of all rests with God. Trust Him. He never lies.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Do I deny the new variation of Afro=Asian came about when the Asian mated with the African? No. Do I try to pretend in my mind that the Asian or African evolved into the African, or that one of them split to become both? No. I accept exactly what we observe. There is no evolution of one into the other. Variation occurs when two subspecies in the species mates. That someone might incorrectly classify those subspecies as separate species in the fossil record to support their belief in evolution never observed, is a personal problem each of you must deal with by accepting what we observe and stop dismissing it.

 

[pitabread]

Variation occurs when two subspecies in the species mates.

You just said, "Oh I understand there is variation within the subspecies".

I asked you explain what this "variation" is. But it appears you don't know.

There is no evolution of one into the other.

But why? That is what you still haven't explained. What is the barrier preventing it?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Let's explore this a little further: When you claim there is "variation within the subspecies", what exactly are you referring to? What is this variation specifically?

Noses may be different, fingerprints, height, etc, but the DNA remains Asian, and easily identifiable as such.

Which seems a blatant contradiction based on your previous point quoted above.

How so, do you not understand the difference between subspecies and species level? Or is it you just refuse to accept the difference and want them to be the same?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You just said, "Oh I understand there is variation within the subspecies".

I asked you explain what this "variation" is. But it appears you don't know.



But why? That is what you still haven't explained. What is the barrier preventing it?

I have, its the entire difference between creation and evolution. You dont want to comprehend the answer.

You still havent accepted by your previous answers that no matter how many mutations the Asian or African subspecies undergoes, they remain Asian and African. That only if those two mate does variation occur within the species. You know the answer, yet refuse to see.

 

[pitabread]

Noses may be different, fingerprints, height, etc, but the DNA remains Asian, and easily identifiable as such.

But what causes those differences? What is the underlying mechanism for them?

How so, do you not understand the difference between subspecies and species level? Or is it you just refuse to accept the difference and want them to be the same?

You claimed, "there is variation within the subspecies"" followed by "Variation occurs when two subspecies in the species mates."

Perhaps you first need to nail down exactly what you mean by 'variation' before trying to make a bunch of claims about it.

 

[Jimmy D]

There is no variation in the species

Oh I understand there is variation within the subspecies,

LOL.

Surely the very fact that there are sub-species show that there is variation within a species?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

What is the barrier preventing it?

The kind of barrier you mean is not necessary.

Is any barrier needed between children and the ocean to keep them from 'evolving'(ICK!) TO another country across the ocean ? no.

They naturally cannot 'evolve'(ICK!) TO another country across the ocean.

And when grown-ups (ICK!) learn enough to build boats to get across the ocean,
they
are just moving, not 'evolving'(ICK!)

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

mechanism

YHWH DESIGNED US ALL.

YHWH designed all that is within us (and allowed the corrupt things evil mankind , society, and the devil came up with)....

 

[tas8831]

Well, let's see: YHWH created all things to reproduce after their own kind.

Evidence for this?

 

[pitabread]

I have, its the entire difference between creation and evolution. You dont want to comprehend the answer.

Oh, this isn't a comprehension issue. The issue is you don't have an answer you're capable of clearly articulating.

You still havent accepted by your previous answers that no matter how many mutations the Asian or African subspecies undergoes, they remain Asian and African.

Why? I mean, you keep claiming this over and over, but you haven't yet articulated the underlying reason.

Let's take a single example: skin pigmentation (i.e. shades of skin color). Why do you think different people have different skin pigmentation?

That only if those two mate does variation occur within the species. You know the answer, yet refuse to see.

But you already said, "I understand there is variation within the subspecies".

You keep contradicting yourself and you don't even see it.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Evidence for this?

As He Says in His Word.

Whoever rejects His Word rejects Jesus, rejects Truth, rejects Life.

As He Says, "ALL CREATION" is the evidence of HIM, and whoever denies Him is judged without mercy involved. They had their chance, He says often.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

LOL.

Surely the very fact that there are sub-species show that there is variation within a species?

Subspecies mating is how new subspecies enter the species. The species does not vary until subspecies mate. The Asian does not evolve into the Afro-Asian, nor does the African. The species remains the same, the human species. Only new subspecies within the species arise.

You have observed nothing else, even if you deny the truth when it comes to Darwins Finches.

 

[tas8831]

DNA. Like a computer program, it is only good for
one type of organism. Each 'kind' of plant and animal
require a specific OS, or DNA; written exclusively for them.

Question begging.

 

[Hieronymus]

Evidence for this?

Everywhere, everything.
Not enough?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Let's take a single example: skin pigmentation (i.e. shades of skin color). Why do you think different people have different skin pigmentation?

If i have to explain dominant and recessive genes....... you are in the wrong conversation. The basics you should understand, or go read a biology book.

But you already said, "I understand there is variation within the subspecies".

You keep contradicting yourself and you don't even see it.

And there is, yet the Asian remains Asian does it not? The African remains African does it not?

Does the African or Asian evolve into the Afro-Asian? Of course they don't. You know how the new subspecies came about, so why deny this in the fossil record, except your attempt to justify your false classifications?

 

[pitabread]

Everywhere, everything.
Not enough?

Aside from being a meaningless answer?