Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Humans aren't apes... but biologically how?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="xianghua" data-source="post: 72460329" data-attributes="member: 395317"><p>thanks. so a better classification of the original creation "kind" is more similar to the family level rather than the species one.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>see above. the fact that we do find that most of the cat species are able to interbreed prove that the family level is more close to the origianl creation "kind" than the species or genus level. the fact that we still didnt seen it happen in this specific case yet doesnt prove that its impossible.</p><p></p><p></p><p>its funny because even according to evolution all monkeys\apes shared a common monkey-like creature. so even according to evolution there is only a single original "kind". so in theory creationists only need to explain how it can happen twice : one in human and one in the original monkey.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>since we have seen that micro bat and marmoset shared about 6 exon loss without a common descent this is incorrect.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="xianghua, post: 72460329, member: 395317"] thanks. so a better classification of the original creation "kind" is more similar to the family level rather than the species one. see above. the fact that we do find that most of the cat species are able to interbreed prove that the family level is more close to the origianl creation "kind" than the species or genus level. the fact that we still didnt seen it happen in this specific case yet doesnt prove that its impossible. its funny because even according to evolution all monkeys\apes shared a common monkey-like creature. so even according to evolution there is only a single original "kind". so in theory creationists only need to explain how it can happen twice : one in human and one in the original monkey. since we have seen that micro bat and marmoset shared about 6 exon loss without a common descent this is incorrect. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Humans aren't apes... but biologically how?
Top
Bottom