Living fossils expose evolution

Just a small observation. It occurs to me that Calypsis's assertions might make more sense if it were granted that:1) We only use the Mosaic system of classification to determine kinds. Thus, if it flys, we'lll say that it's of the same "kind." Case closed. Modern classification systems just get in the way.2) We accept a YEC timeline so that all fossils would then be considered to be contemperaneous with each other and with modern species. Agreed, this flys in the face of all available evidence. However, at least it's a way to recast lineages as just "variations within a kind." Maybe this is why the idea of living fossils is supposed to be the "atom bomb" that destroys evolution. If you can pretend that all species have remained unchanged over time, well then, of course evolution doesn't make sense.While neither of these suppositions has any support in any available, credible evidence, maybe they're at least a way of making sense of what Calypsis is trying to say.

Perhaps some clarification. Are you using a "Mosaic" system of classification to determine what a "kind" is? Are you using the inclusion of bats in the list of unclean fowls at Leviticus 11 as the determinant of which "kind" bats belong to? If so, are bats then the same "kind" of animal as storks, herons and owls? And perhaps the answer of this question is obvious, but why do you think that a "Mosaic" system is superior to any modern system of classification?