How an Evangelical Creationist Accepted Evolution

[The Cadet]

B. Every plant and animal existing today.
Plant anything and come up with another plant and
you falsify kinds. Altering the genes does not count.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

Trivially easy.

 

[sfs]

I can write a research paper based on that question. But you can not do the similar to an arbitrary evolution question. Evolution is a much much harder science. There is no theory about it (there ARE speculations).

False.

All you people are doing is trying to describe what you observed.

False.

You are not fair. I do not know genetics.

And yet you consider yourself in a position to judge whether geneticists are right about their own field.

You do. But I certainly can ask layman questions about genetics. And I estimate that you can not answer most of them.

You are always free to ask layman questions about genetics.

You can do the similar to me by asking me any geology questions and see how would I respond.

I can't think of any reason why I would want to do that. Instead, I'll ask the same thing I've been asking: what is a better model for biological data than evolution?

 

[Jimmy D]

A. Kind is a group of animals that came down from one
basic ancestor.
For example, dogs and wolves are all of one kind. It does
not matter whether they can -still- procreate with others
of the same kind. Ring species are still part of a kind.

B. Every plant and animal existing today.
Plant anything and come up with another plant and
you falsify kinds. Altering the genes does not count.

A rare post attempting to describe the creationist model we hear so much about - good stuff pat34lee.

Can I ask how many of these kinds were there?

 

[juvenissun]

I can't think of any reason why I would want to do that. Instead, I'll ask the same thing I've been asking: what is a better model for biological data than evolution?

None. Strictly speaking, you do not NEED this philosophical model at all. Just simple logic and scientific methods would give you the same reasoning power.

Furthermore, we should not take the model as a truth. You may not, but people do. In a wider view, it is far from even being an acceptable scientific model. If you have to, for your fame's sake, you can set it high up there as a working guide. That is all.

 

[pat34lee]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

Trivially easy.

You ignored the definition in A. You have new species according
to some scientists, not new kinds.

 

[pat34lee]

A rare post attempting to describe the creationist model we hear so much about - good stuff pat34lee.

Can I ask how many of these kinds were there?

As many as were made. How many species (even kinds) have gone extinct
over the years? We have no way to tell for sure.

 

[Loudmouth]

A. Kind is a group of animals that came down from one
basic ancestor.
For example, dogs and wolves are all of one kind. It does
not matter whether they can -still- procreate with others
of the same kind. Ring species are still part of a kind.

Can species share a common ancestor and yet be unable to produce viable offspring between species?

B. Every plant and animal existing today.
Plant anything and come up with another plant and
you falsify kinds. Altering the genes does not count.

What shared genetic feature between species would indicate that they share a common ancestor? What features would a fossil need in order to evidence common ancestry?

 

[lasthero]

You ignored the definition in A. You have new species according
to some scientists, not new kinds.

What's a kind?

 

[lasthero]

A. Kind is a group of animals that came down from one
basic ancestor.
For example, dogs and wolves are all of one kind. It does
not matter whether they can -still- procreate with others
of the same kind. Ring species are still part of a kind.

This isn't really a definition, it's an example.

If we have two animals, how do we determine if they're the same kind or not? How do we know that wolves and dogs are the same kind? What's the criteria?

 

[The Cadet]

You ignored the definition in A. You have new species according
to some scientists, not new kinds.

Oh. Well the problem in A is rather straightforward then: you and me are both part of the "human" kind, but you, me, and Bonzo the Chimpanzee are all a part of the "primate" kind, as we all share a common ancestor.

 

[pat34lee]

As many as were made. How many species (even kinds) have gone extinct
over the years? We have no way to tell for sure.

There are probably ways to make an educated guess. One guy
estimated about 8,000 including extinct animals in order to
determine how many animals would have been aboard the ark.

An aside, did you know that many 'species' of dinosaurs
are actually the same, just juvenile and adult?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091009-dinosaur-species-never-existed.html

 

[pat34lee]

Oh. Well the problem in A is rather straightforward then: you and me are both part of the "human" kind, but you, me, and Bonzo the Chimpanzee are all a part of the "primate" kind, as we all share a common ancestor.

Nope. My kind never mated with monkeys.

 

[Loudmouth]

Nope. My kind never mated with monkeys.

How did you determine that we don't belong to the primate kind?

 

[Loudmouth]

There are probably ways to make an educated guess. One guy
estimated about 8,000 including extinct animals in order to
determine how many animals would have been aboard the ark.

An aside, did you know that many 'species' of dinosaurs
are actually the same, just juvenile and adult?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091009-dinosaur-species-never-existed.html

Is a Triceratops a juvenile T. rex?

 

[lasthero]

Nope. My kind never mated with monkeys.

Chimps aren't monkeys.

Regardless, could you please give an actual definition of what a 'kind' is? If we have two animals, how do we determine if they're the same kind or not? What creteria are you using?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope. My kind never mated with monkeys.

It depends upon how you define "monkeys". You do obviously share a common ancestor with apes, monkeys, tarsiers, and lemurs to start with. Denying a fact does not make it not so.

 

[The Cadet]

Nope. My kind never mated with monkeys.

Okay, so how do we establish this?

 

[pat34lee]

How did you determine that we don't belong to the primate kind?

From the source. Genesis.

 

[pat34lee]

Is a Triceratops a juvenile T. rex?

About as much as a chimp is a juvenile gorilla.

 

[pat34lee]

It depends upon how you define "monkeys". You do obviously share a common ancestor with apes, monkeys, tarsiers, and lemurs to start with. Denying a fact does not make it not so.

Nope. My ancestry is pure human back to the creation.