Examples

[lasthero]

Well, we regularly see the so-called evolutionary tree of life in textbooks, etc. It's presented as fact regarding the way that the main lifeform groups on this planet have progressed over the supposed millions of years, so I would like to know what creatures that are living today can demonstrate that the story in the pretty trees is really happening all around us. If it's not possible to do that for whatever reason, then it's just a story based on belief about what the evidence in the physical world is really indicating about the past.

You totally did not answer his question.

And you still haven't answered mine. What's a kind? If I have two organisms, how do tell if they're the same kind or not?

 

[Not_By_Chance]

If I have two organisms, how do tell if they're the same kind or not?

Well, I would ask the experts if I were you, but I doubt if you'll only get any consensus in the answers.

 

[lasthero]

Well, I would ask the experts if I were you, but I doubt if you'll only get any consensus in the answers.

I doubt I will, either, mostly because - as has been repeatedly stressed - the 'experts' don't use that term. Why should I expect the 'experts' to give me the definiton of a term they don't even use?

But you are, and you're asking for an example of a new kind being made, so it behooves you to actually have a definition of what you're asking for, otherwise there's no real point to asking. It's like asking someone to find a 'potadom', but refusing to tell them what 'potadom' is. How is anyone supposed to find something without a definition?

 

[Not_By_Chance]

(Leviticus puts "kind" at the species level - do you accept that scripture?)

Do you mean this verse as it's the one that seems most relevant: Lev 7:14 He is to bring one of each kind as an offering, a contribution to the LORD; it belongs to the priest who sprinkles the blood of the fellowship offerings.

The Geological Society of America recognizes

Hmm, I though Geologists were concerned with rocks, rather than fossils?

 

[lasthero]

Hmm, I though Geologists were concerned with rocks, rather than fossils?

Do you know what fossils are made of?

 

[Not_By_Chance]

I doubt I will, either, mostly because - as has been repeatedly stressed - the 'experts' don't use that term. Why should I expect the 'experts' to give me the definiton of a term they don't even use?

But you are, and you're asking for an example of a new kind being made, so it behooves you to actually have a definition of what you're asking for, otherwise there's no real point to asking. It's like asking someone to find a 'potadom', but refusing to tell them what 'potadom' is. How is anyone supposed to find something without a definition?

Well, it doesn't seem to be a problem when artists draw their fancy trees of life in our text books, so you could just use that as a guide. Failing that, how about the Biblical "kinds" which seem to be creatures which can mate and produce fertile offspring being classified as the same kind? So using the latter for instance, you could check to see if two creatures were able to mate and if they weren't, classify them as different kinds.

 

[lasthero]

Well, it doesn't seem to be a problem when artists draw their fancy trees of life in our text books, so you could just use that as a guide. Failing that, how about the Biblical "kinds" which seem to be creatures which can mate and produce fertile offspring being classified as the same kind? So using the latter for instance, you could check to see if two creatures were able to mate and if they weren't, classify them as different kinds.

So, let me make sure I understand you correctly.

If two animals can mate and produce fertile offspring, they're the same kind.

If they can't mate and produce fertile offspring, they're not the same kind.

So, for instance, if I had a group of animals that started out able to produce fertile offspring together, and as that group of animals grew, certain animals in that group, for whatever reason, became unable to produce fertile offspring with each anymore, this would be an example of new kinds being made. Such an example is what you're looking for?

 

[Not_By_Chance]

Do you know what fossils are made of?

Rock is definted as, "The hard solid material that forms part of the surface of the earth and some other planets."
A fossil is defined as, "The remains of an animal or a plant which have become hard and turned into rock."
A Geologist is defined as, "A scientist who studies geology."
Geology is defined as, "The scientific study of the earth, including the origin and history of the rocks and soil of which the earth is made...The origin and history of the rocks and soil of a particular area."

However...
Palaeontology, "The study of fossils (= the remains of animals or plants in rocks) as a guide to the history of life on earth."
Palaeontologist, "A person who studies fossils."

 

[Not_By_Chance]

So, for instance, if I had a group of animals that started out able to produce fertile offspring together, and as that group of animals grew, certain animals in that group, for whatever reason, became unable to produce fertile offspring with each anymore, this would be an example of new kinds being made. Such an example is what you're looking for?

You would have to ask the experts about this but I would have thought that if the new group were unable to produce fertile offspring with the original group, but could mate together within the new group, to produce fertile offspring, they would have become a different kind.

 

[lasthero]

You would have to ask the experts

Again, the experts don't use the term 'kind', so asking them would be rather silly. Since you're the one using the term and asking for examples, it only really matters how you use it.

about this but I would have thought that if the new group were unable to produce fertile offspring with the original group, but could mate together within the new group, to produce fertile offspring, they would have become a different kind.

Okay.

First, let me put this goalpost here.

Don't move that, please.

If that's what you're looking for, there are examples of it. Your definition of kind is pretty close to the definiton of 'species', and new species have been observed to emerge. A good example of this can be found with ring species.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species

This is a good site, too.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation

 

[Not_By_Chance]

Again, the experts don't use the term 'kind', so asking them would be rather silly. Since you're the one using the term and asking for examples, it only really matters how you use it.



Okay.

First, let me put this goalpost here.

Don't move that, please.

If that's what you're looking for, there are examples of it. Your definition of kind is pretty close to the definiton of 'species', and new species have been observed to emerge. A good example of this can be found with ring species.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species

This is a good site, too.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation

Interesting articles. However, I think this text from the second article is quite telling and indicates to me that perhaps we don't know as much as we think we do:-

"Whatever we choose to call them, these two cases clearly illustrate how a lineage can split and begin to make its way down two separate evolutionary paths. Of course, there's no way to know if these paths will converge at some point in the future or are even completely distinct now." [Emphasis added]

 

[lasthero]

Interesting articles. However, I think this text from the second article is quite telling and indicates to me that perhaps we don't know as much as we think we do:-

"Whatever we choose to call them, these two cases clearly illustrate how a lineage can split and begin to make its way down two separate evolutionary paths. Of course, there's no way to know if these paths will converge at some point in the future or are even completely distinct now." [Emphasis added]

?
Since you're not actually arguing against anything here, am I to assume that you accept that new 'kinds' can be made?

 

[Not_By_Chance]

Since you're not actually arguing against anything here, am I to assume that you accept that new 'kinds' can be made?

Not really - the examples given just seem to indicate that sufficient change has occurred to prevent breeding at the opposite ends [of the so-called ring]. To me, believing what God has indicated in the early chapters of the Bible, I would conclude that He built enormous variety into the genetic code to allow for His creatures to adapt, but at the same time, He added something to prevent whatever He means by "kind" from changing into another kind. This would be in disagreement with evolutionary theory because it would not, for instance, allow reptiles to change into birds, no matter how much time was allowed.

 

[lasthero]

Not really - the examples given just seem to indicate that sufficient change has occurred to prevent breeding at the opposite ends [of the so-called ring].

But the animals at the end of the ring can't bring forth offspring with the population they came from. By the definition of 'kind' that you used before, that means they're a new 'kind'.

You would have to ask the experts about this but I would have thought that if the new group were unable to produce fertile offspring with the original group, but could mate together within the new group, to produce fertile offspring, they would have become a different kind.

You clearly stated this, you don't get to move the goalposts now.

To me, believing what God has indicated in the early chapters of the Bible, I would conclude that He built enormous variety into the genetic code to allow for His creatures to adapt, but at the same time, He added something to prevent whatever He means by "kind" from changing into another kind.

So you don't know what a kind is, but you know that God made something that prevents new kinds from being made.

What is this 'something'?

This would be in disagreement with evolutionary theory because it would not, for instance, allow reptiles to change into birds, no matter how much time was allowed.

Are birds and reptiles kinds?

 

[The Cadet]

Well, I would ask the experts if I were you, but I doubt if you'll only get any consensus in the answers.

So, in other words, you're demanding that we show you an example of something doing X, but you can't even tell us what X means? Seriously? Here, let me take your original argument, and explain what effect this has:

I'd like to ask those who consider themselves experts on these matters to provide, let's say, a dozen examples of creatures alive today that are definitely, without doubt, evolving into a totally different flipdoowhacker of creature.

Define your terms. Then we can talk about whether or not your definition is applicable and whether or not we can answer your challenge.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

I'm merely trying to determine whether or not the changes that are being reported are really leading anywhere in evolutionary terms or whether they are just dead-end slight variations, whether or not they would be classified as a different species, kind or whatever else you want to call them (note the original quote in post #72 if you will). I'm trying to find out what current evidence in the real world supports the evolutionary tree of life and not the Biblical model.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

So you don't know what a kind is, but you know that God made something that prevents new kinds from being made.

What is this 'something'?

You'll have to ask God when you meet Him!

Are birds and reptiles kinds?

Well, they are totally different types of creatures, so I would say yes, they are.

 

[The Cadet]

I'm trying to find out what current evidence in the real world supports the evolutionary tree of life and not the Biblical model.

Have you looked into the twin nested hierarchies of genetics and phylogeny?

 

[Not_By_Chance]

You clearly stated this, you don't get to move the goalposts now.

If no-one knows where the goalposts really are, how can they know if they have been moved? Just because I said they might be a different kind (and I was only expressing an opinion), doesn't mean that such change is leading anywhere down the evolutionary path that could lead to someone in the future declaring, "Hey fellow scientists, I've discovered that birds have evolved into [land-dwelling whales or whatever]"

 

[lasthero]

You'll have to ask God when you meet Him!

God's not the one using these terms when he asks for examples. You are.

Well, they are totally different types of creatures, so I would say yes, they are.

Except they're not 'totally different'. They have many things in common.