STILL no evidence FOR creation/ID

[AV1611VET]

Yes, I've heard your "kind = genus" argument before based on the fact that you Ctrl-F'd the word "kind" in the dictionary listing for genus.

If you look up "kind" in a thesaurus, you can equate it to a whole bunch of other words too including brand, type, variety, sort, set, order, etc...

Not a particularly useful exercise in trying to determine what the word "kind" means in this context.

If you can find a better synonym for "kind" than "genus," let me know.

 

[pitabread]

If you can find a better synonym for "kind" than "genus," let me know.

Given how the Bible uses the term, "species" seems a better fit in that context.

 

[AV1611VET]

In terms of the way the Bible uses the term, "species" seems a better fit in that context.

I disagree … but whatever.

I'm not the one scratching my head over it.

 

[pitabread]

I disagree … but whatever.

Genus is just an arbitrary taxonomic rank. And it wasn't even really used as such until the 17th or 18th century.

At least species has some form of biological reality to it (even if still problematic).

I'm not the one scratching my head over it.

No, but your brethren sure bring it up a lot.

 

[Speedwell]

It doesn't really matter. There is nothing in the Bible which indicates that the term "kind" represents some immutable divine taxonomy which evolution cannot violate.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Wheat is certainly not just wheat . That’s just the common name for several different species some of which are allopolyploids with different chromosome numbers. Macaroni wheat is a doubled chromosome, fertile hybrid ( an allopolyploid) of a goat grass and a triticum species. Goat grasses are in a different genus ( according to your bizarre creationist phylogeny they’re a different kind) . Bread wheat is a doubled chromosome hybrid of macaroni wheat and a second goat grass. This actually happened twice .

Can you even translate this into English? All I got out of it was a mild insult and some unintelligible gobbledygook. If evolution relies on the confusion of its adherents to convince them of the truth of evolutionism, I think you'd make a good priest.

 

[Skreeper]

Can you even translate this into English? All I got out of it was a mild insult and some unintelligible gobbledygook. If evolution relies on the confusion of its adherents to convince them of the truth of evolutionism, I think you'd make a good priest.

Having a basic understanding of science and biology is kind of required if you want to discuss and criticize a scientific theory.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Having a basic understanding of science and biology is kind of required if you want to discuss and criticize a scientific theory.

Are you confirming my hypothesis, that the theory of evolution relies on the confusion of its adherents to convince them of the truth of evolutionism? Or did you want to debate?

 

[Skreeper]

Are you confirming my hypothesis, that the theory of evolution relies on the confusion of its adherents to convince them of the truth of evolutionism? Or did you want to debate?

Quantum mechanics are also very confusing to most people but I doubt that's the goal.

I don't accept evolution because it's confusing and I just decided to go with it. I accept evolution because I spent time learning about it and the evidence supporting it.

In conclusion, your hypothesis has no merrit.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

In conclusion, your hypothesis has no merrit.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, as you seem to be affirming my hypothesis that evolution is based on its adherents not properly understanding what their own theory preaches.

 

[Skreeper]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, as you seem to be affirming my hypothesis that evolution is based on its adherents not properly understanding what their own theory preaches.

Based on my time I have spent on this forum so far it's usually the creationists that don't seem to understand what evolution is or how it works.

I may not understand every detail of the ToE, but I understand enough to accept it as the best supported explanation for the diversity of life on this planet.

 

[Brightmoon]

Can you even translate this into English? All I got out of it was a mild insult and some unintelligible gobbledygook. If evolution relies on the confusion of its adherents to convince them of the truth of evolutionism, I think you'd make a good priest.

If you don’t know what an allopolyploid ,is then you have no business even discussing evolution, let alone criticizing it. Bread wheat is a double allopolyploid as it’s ancestor,macaroni wheat, is also an allopolyploid. Fertile allopolyploids and autopolyploids are speciation events happening within one generation, in other words , rapid macroevolution. Which is something ignorant people claim doesn’t happen, even though this is extremely common in plants And does occasionally happen in animals.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

If you don’t know what an allopolyploid ,is then you have no business even discussing evolution, let alone criticizing it.

So because I don't know what "allopolyploid" is, I can't understand how a lizard can give birth to a bird? Is it really any wonder why evolution and its adherents are the subject of such mockery?

 

[Skreeper]

So because I don't know what "allopolyploid" is, I can't understand how a lizard can give birth to a bird? Is it really any wonder why evolution and its adherents are the subject of such mockery?

The only ones getting laughed at are creationists that think evolution is about lizards giving birth to birds...

It appears you don't even understand the basics of evolution. How about you start by giving us what you think is the definition of evolution so we can test that?

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

The only ones getting laughed at are creationists that think evolution is about lizards giving birth to birds...

It appears you don't even understand the basics of evolution. How about you start by giving us what you think is the definition of evolution so we can test that?

Evolution is the belief that all organisms share a common ancestor.

 

[Speedwell]

Evolution is the belief that all organisms share a common ancestor.

Evolution is the process by which the creatures we see around us developed from a common ancestor.
But why do you have an objection to common ancestry?

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Evolution is the process by which the creatures we see around us developed from a common ancestor.
But why do you have an objection to common ancestry?

The historical account in the bible identifies that all organisms share a common creator, and reproduce according to their kinds. There is no common ancestor for all creatures - only those of the same kinds.

 

[AV1611VET]

But why do you have an objection to common ancestry?

It makes monkeys out of us.

 

[Speedwell]

The historical account in the bible identifies that all organisms share a common creator, and reproduce according to their kinds. There is no common ancestor for all creatures - only those of the same kinds.

What makes you think it's an "historical account" and why should we care what you think about it anyway?

 

[Brightmoon]

So because I don't know what "allopolyploid" is, I can't understand how a lizard can give birth to a bird? Is it really any wonder why evolution and its adherents are the subject of such mockery?

Precisely! You’re too ignorant of what evolution is to be criticizing it. And lizards never became birds. And as far as mocking someone’s else’s ignorant stance , I wouldn’t go there if I were you. Polyploid speciation is a macroevolutionary event . It’s also something I learned about in high school-50 years ago . Your ignorance of this is not showing you in a good light