The bible says "2 of each kind" meaning the "family" is the extension of the origin word "kind". He explains the process very well scientifically if you're willing to listen. He describes the causes of gene mutation in DNA as well. As for humanity, the original DNA code was given to Adam and Eve. Perhaps watch the video in full. I'm not arguing points because Darwinism never talks about possible origin except for in a personal letter.
Let's recap the situation so far.
In post 97, you post a video.
In post 116, I say the video is almost an hour long and ask you to provide a few bullet points to summarize that video.
In post 118, You refer me back to the video in post 97.
In post 119, I point out that telling me to watch the video that I asked for a summary of is not actually providing me with a summary.
In post 121, you said that the video in post 97 was NOT the video I was asking about, but it actually was. I figure you got the idea that I was originally asking you about the video you posted in post 77. I'll take this as an honest mistake, of course. In any case, you directed me to a particular point in the video "about twenty minutes in."
I went back to that video and looked to see what was about 20 minutes in. There was a chapter that started at about the 17:30 mark, so I figured that's the bit you wanted me to watch, since that was about 20 minutes in. I watched it, had a question (about how we could get the wide variety of cats we have today if only one kind of cat was in the ark if there was no evolution). I posted that question in post 124.
In post 126, you were just rude, saying that I should have watched the video. Of course, I
had watched the video, that's what prompted me to ask the question about cats.
And then in post 127, you specifically address the bit where Ken Hamm said that "kind" probably equates to "family," which was the basis of the cat question I asked. In that post, you claim that Ken Hamm never said that kind probably equates to family.
In post 129, I show you that Ken Hamm did say precisely that, giving a link to the video with the time stamp so it would start playing directly at the relevant part. I even went through and provided a written transcript of what he said to show you that Ken Hamm really did say kind probably equates to family, despite your claims he never said that.
In post 131, you claimed that I had originally quoted Ken Hamm as saying something other than "kind probably equates to family."
In post 133, you try to say that Ken Hamm was showing what the Bible does NOT say.
In post 135, I pointed out that I never claimed he had said anything different, I provided a recap of the conversation that led to that point, and I asked you to show me where I said that Ken Hamm said something other than "kind probably equates to family." You have ignored that request. May I assume you have withdrawn the claim that I originally quoted Ken Hamm as saying something that contradicts the "kind probably equates to family" statement?
In post 137, I pointed out that what you mentioned in post 133, what Ken Hamm showed the Bible does not say was that the Bible does not say that Noah took every animal into the ark, it only says he took the land animals on. I pointed out that I never contradicted that statement, and I even included it in the transcript.
In post 140, you backtracked on that and said basically that you had misunderstood me, so I'm willing to let that go, since the "different Christians disagree on what Kind means" discussion isn't relevant to the question I actually wanted you to answer, the one about the cats.
Now you are directing me to go and watch the video from post 97 in full, despite the fact that this is the video I originally asked you to summarize in a few bullet points because it's an hour long. We're right back where we started!
I don't think I'm asking too much here. A few points to sum up the main arguments in the video from post 97, and an answer to the cat question. I'll post the cat question again for you so you don't have to go looking for it.
Ken says there is only one cat kind. How do you think we got the huge variety of cats in the few thousand years since Noah's flood if not for evolution? I mean, from what Ken says, all the cats that were taken on board the ark were the same kind, and yet from them we have everything from tigers to lions to cheetahs, pumas, servals, ocelots and a whole bunch of others (see
THIS page on Wikipedia for a list of different types of cats). How did we get all these different types of cats if not for evolution?
