Biblical "Kinds" are actually a thing! Here's why

[Henry Dalcke]

Hello my fellow Christians,

I'm a programmer of genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks from Germany and I found out something quite problematic for the theory of evolution.
I describe it in the following three papers. Please read and share your thoughts on it.

towards an extended fundamental kinds hypothesis of biblical creationism

On The Unverifiability Of The Main Premise Of The Theory Of Evolution

An attempt to define the biblical "kind"

 

[Servant78]

Jesus has fed 5000 people He created fish and bread out of nothing.

 

[Job 33:6]

Hello my fellow Christians,

I'm a programmer of genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks from Germany and I found out something quite problematic for the theory of evolution.
I describe it in the following three papers. Please read and share your thoughts on it.

towards an extended fundamental kinds hypothesis of biblical creationism

On The Unverifiability Of The Main Premise Of The Theory Of Evolution

An attempt to define the biblical "kind"

On your third paper regarding defining biblical kinds, it doesn't touch on the order of the fossil succession. For example, it describes the idea that maybe reptile/dinosaur "kinds" simply overlap with bird "kinds" and therefore it isn't a transition but is rather just a coincidental overlap.

But the article doesn't reflect on the fact that bird-like reptiles don't appear until the end of the history of dinosaurs, while the appearance of reptile-like birds/raptors appear at the beginning of all known birds and coincidentally right toward the end of the end of theropod dinosaurs.

And so there is of course more than just a coincidental overlap to take into consideration.

And this is a major issue for critics of evolution, one that will presumably never be addressed.

 

[Job 33:6]

Hello my fellow Christians,

I'm a programmer of genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks from Germany and I found out something quite problematic for the theory of evolution.
I describe it in the following three papers. Please read and share your thoughts on it.

towards an extended fundamental kinds hypothesis of biblical creationism

On The Unverifiability Of The Main Premise Of The Theory Of Evolution

An attempt to define the biblical "kind"

Regarding the "unverifiability" paper:

Typically, research papers aren't particularly useful if their goal is to make an effort to describe things that are claimed to be unknown.

To make a paper useful, ideally you want to use evidence to solve an issue, rather than taking an opposite approach of saying "well they don't know that". Especially when there is no clear paper referenced in your commentary. It's not even clear who's research you're attempting to critique or what they say.

Also, it's interesting that you think that, because there are no clear boundaries between species, that this is somehow evidence against evidence speciation, rather than examining these blurred separations as being evidence that there is no actual clear barrier between species, ie that speciation could therefore occur because there is no clear obstacle in between one group and another.

A much better approach would be to demonstrate what that boundary is between species, and to therefore conclude that speciation isn't occuring, rather than to say that there are finite limits (a claim made without clear justification) but then to turn and to say that you simply aren't sure what those limits are, and because those limits are unclear, therefore no one can know if evolution is occuring or not.

It's just not the best approach.

To summarize, when you write research or technical critiques, you want to make positive statements with clear evidence for your position. You don't want to spend time making vague anti-arguments with no clear outcome. Especially when the anti argument comes with the qualifier of being "impossible to know".

 

[Job 33:6]

Hello my fellow Christians,

I'm a programmer of genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks from Germany and I found out something quite problematic for the theory of evolution.
I describe it in the following three papers. Please read and share your thoughts on it.

towards an extended fundamental kinds hypothesis of biblical creationism

On The Unverifiability Of The Main Premise Of The Theory Of Evolution

An attempt to define the biblical "kind"

The first article also appears to miss discussing the fact that it isn't merely a coincidental overlapping of traits, rather it's a precise succession of traits that are evidence of evolution.

The succession being both temporal (fish>amphibian>reptile>mammal/bird, Cambrian, Devonian, carboniferous, mid to late Mesozoic), as well as cladistically identical to successions derived independently in other fields, ie the DNA in a bird/mammal is more similar to that of a reptile than of a fish, and an amphibians DNA is more similar to that of a fish or reptile than any bird or mammal, and this is extensively precise to the extent that whales have DNA more similar to hippos (mammal-mammal) than whales to fish (mammal-fish) despite morphologically appearing to be closer to fish, and by comparison whales appear way later in the succession, post Mesozoic appearance of mammals, as opposed to early on like other fish. But it goes much further in precision as well, where you could pick any 3 animals on planet earth and see the same cladistic pattern. Any 3 animals at all.

And this is very important to understand.

If you really want to break through the concept of transitionals, you really have to target the bread and butter, you can't just beat around the bush with ideas that don't clearly address what transitionals are.