What is the barrier between micro and macro evolution?

[inquiring mind]

So hang on, you accept that gradual changes could result in a different 'kind' that cannot interbreed with the original? Colour me confused.

Not a different kind... an infertile offspring, which is still the same kind as its parents.

 

[Bradskii]

Not a different kind... an infertile offspring, which is still the same kind as its parents.

That would require breeding two creatures that are already widely separated genetically from an original ancestor. But still can, at that time, breed. But your position is that those two creatures have changed dramatically...but can't change anymore.

 

[inquiring mind]

That would require breeding two creatures that are already widely separated genetically from an original ancestor. But still can, at that time, breed. But your position is that those two creatures have changed dramatically...but can't change anymore.

It doesn't matter how widely separated they are, if the can breed they're the same kind. I've not said they can't change anymore, variations will continue indefinitely for each individual parent with different lines, but not for these particular two because their offspring is infertile. Again, the infertile offspring is still the same kind as its parents though.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It doesn't matter how widely separated they are, if the can breed they're the same kind. I've not said they can't change anymore, variations will continue indefinitely for each individual parent with different lines, but not for these particular two because their offspring is infertile. Again, the infertile offspring is still the same kind as its parents though.

What Kind are dolphins and whales?

 

[inquiring mind]

What Kind are dolphins and whales?

The water kind according to Genesis 1:21

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Sounds like something in transition between a water based creature and a land based one. What do you think?

Not necessarily, but not excluded either.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The water kind according to Genesis 1:21

'Water kind'.

 

[inquiring mind]

'Water kind'.

Did you think it would have one those fancy Latin names?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Did you think it would have one those fancy Latin names?

Considering it wasn't written in Latin but in Aramaic, then no, not likely.
But again, all you are doing is highlighting how useless the term Kind is. 'Water Kind' is useless, especially if we take your "reproduce according to their Kind" claim, so that means that a fish can mate with a dolphin no problem, correct? Or a shark with an octopus? Or a squid with an eel? They're all 'Water Kind' after all.

 

[inquiring mind]

Considering it wasn't written in Latin but in Aramaic, then no, not likely.
But again, all you are doing is highlighting how useless the term Kind is. 'Water Kind' is useless, especially if we take your "reproduce according to their Kind" claim, so that means that a fish can mate with a dolphin no problem, correct? Or a shark with an octopus? Or a squid with an eel? They're all 'Water Kind' after all.

Now you're getting it... there are different water kinds, each determined by their ability to breed. Baraminology will will eventually give them all fancy names.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Now you're getting it... there are different water kinds, each determined by their ability to breed. Baraminology will will eventually give them all fancy names.

But there isn't. There's just 'water kinds', or to use the actual text: "great whales, and every living creature that moveth," (Genesis 1:21), so there isn't just 'different water kinds'. There's only two in the Bibles: Whales and non-Whales.

 

[inquiring mind]

But there isn't. There's just 'water kinds', or to use the actual text: "great whales, and every living creature that moveth," (Genesis 1:21), so there isn't just 'different water kinds'. There's only two in the Bibles: Whales and non-Whales.

Non-whales is pretty broad, especially when you consider the primary factor for a kind is the ability to breed.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Non-whales is pretty broad, especially when you consider the primary factor for a kind is the ability to breed.

Exactly my point on why Kind is a useless term in biology. It's too broad to mean anything serious and worthwhile in science.

 

[inquiring mind]

Exactly my point on why Kind is a useless term in biology. It's too broad to mean anything serious and worthwhile in science.

I think we just made a 360... I'm gonna take a break. Enjoyed the conversation.

 

[sfs]

Considering it wasn't written in Latin but in Aramaic

Hebrew

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Hebrew

Was it not Aramaic then Hebrew?

 

[Bradskii]

Not necessarily, but not excluded either.

It can breathe in water. It can breathe on land. It can swim underwater. It can walk on land (it climbs trees for heaven's sake...). I can't see that anyone could possibly argue that it's not a combination of a creature that lives in water and one that lives on land. It does both!

QED.

 

[Bradskii]

It doesn't matter how widely separated they are, if the can breed they're the same kind. I've not said they can't change anymore, variations will continue indefinitely for each individual parent with different lines, but not for these particular two because their offspring is infertile. Again, the infertile offspring is still the same kind as its parents though.

But the two parents can still breed. A horse and a donkey will produce a mule. The donkey and the horse are descendents of an earlier creature. And have obviously changed. But the horse can still breed with another horse and the donkey with another donkey. But you say the descendents of those couplings won't change any more. With nothing to support that claim. And I mean nothing whatsoever.

Look at the example of the fish that can live on land. With very few changes (and none are actually necessary) it can move from a water based creature to a land based one. And one small 'microevolutionary' variation of the original could lose the ability to breath air and the other variation might lose the ability to breath in water. To call a tree climbing, land based, air breathing creature the same 'kind' as a fish is not credible by any stretch of anyone's imagination.

 

[sfs]

Was it not Aramaic then Hebrew?

Aramaic became the common language late in the Biblical (i.e. Old Testament) period. Only a couple of parts of the books of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic; everything else is written in Hebrew.

 

[Bradskii]

Aramaic became the common language late in the Biblical (i.e. Old Testament) period. Only a couple of parts of the books of Ezra and Daniel are written in Aramaic; everything else is written in Hebrew.

Whatever happened to @AV1611VET? He claimed (and he was deadly serious) that it was written in 17th century English as per the KJV.