Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Was my post addressed to you or to DH?
So science......is for scientists.
You and others here are not scientists
I agree, but questioning is hardly arguing. I will remain a skeptic until all my questions are answered. Sadly we can't get past the defensive stances to the real questions.
Yup.
I don't think you're guilty of this, but what do you think of scientists who come here and tell us how we should interpret the Bible?Does it feel bad to be so grossly mistaken about a point you didn't seem to know anything about?
I'd be more concerned with asbestos, if I was you.And yet you don't hold quantum mechanics to the same level of questioning? You aren't going to become a "latex paint skeptic" because you don't know anything about DLVO theory, stabilization of colloidal dispersions or latex chemistry?
Living things aren't just "similar".
The fall in a hierarchically nested pattern of similarity.
Exactly the kind of pattern that should exist, if life shares ancestry.
No "created" or "designed" product, falls into such a pattern.
I'd be more concerned with asbestos, if I was you.
I don't think you're guilty of this, but what do you think of scientists who come here and tell us how we should interpret the Bible?
Furthermore, what do you think of scientists who say we should interpret the Bible the way they interpret(ed) It ... and they are atheists!?
You are making the exact same kinds of requests to DH as you did to me.
Not true and that is why I pointed out that the question to you and to DH was not the same. Since many of you make such a big deal about "kind" and "transitionals" etc.. I even provided the biology definition that I am using for DH, something you conveniently ignore, but it seems to matter not. It is nothing more than a diversion tactic, IMO. When I say a different "kind" it is not a huge mystery what I am suggesting but it is an opportunity to throw in semantics to deflect the conversation.
No, critiquing science based on one's personal ignorance of the science should be applied the same way across all sciences.
You are incorrect. I am a PhD geologist with 20+ years of R&D chemistry under my belt. I have numerous peer reviewed publications in chemistry, many presentations nationally and internationally in geology and chemistry as well as several patents in chemistry.
Does it feel bad to be so grossly mistaken about a point you didn't seem to know anything about?
My apologies.
Now that you've made your credentials known walk me through the molecular/atomic changes necessary in order for evolution to occur.
Ask, "To which taxonomic rank do both of these creatures belong?"View attachment 205925
If I wanted to ask a “biology scientist” if these two images were of the same “kind”, biology wise, what would be the proper language for doing that?
Ask, "To which taxonomic rank do both of these creatures belong?"
In this case it would be the phylum Chordata.
None are "totally different" as they all have characteristics in common. Grouping creatures into categories based on common characteristics requires no "explanation" as it sets up no barrier to evolution.OK, thanks, therefore, it seems to me that asking that would result in most everything being of the same "kind". Is that not very convenient for those who promote evolution as there is no need to explain how any one entity evolved into a totally different entity because they are all the same?
Species are comprised of creatures with similar characteristics which are completely interfertile. It is the fundamental classification of biology. Genera are groups of two or more species, Genera are grouped into Families. Families into Orders, Orders into Classes, Classes into Phyla, Phyla into Kingdoms and Kingdoms into Domains."Chordata is a familiar phylum that includes organisms like mammals, fish, birds,reptiles, and amphibians (all vertebrates); sea squirts (tunicates); and lancelets (cephalochordates). All chordates have a notochord, a dorsal nerve cord, and pharyngeal slits at some point in their development.Jan 20, 2016"
What about using "Species" or "Genus", when would they be used and can you provide an example?
Although it is risky to attempt to classify creatures based on so little information as is supplied by no more than two photos, I think even a layman would be able to tell that the two creatures depicted were not the same species, without asking.With the chicken and horse example, would it be appropriate to ask if they were of the same "species"?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?