Anyway, I was told I can't ask for evidence if I don't SPECIFICALLY define my terms. This is interesting to me, because many of the taxonomic ranks are not exact definitions, but are often defined by the animals in them.
The difference here is that 'blurriness' of divisions in groupings is an inevitable and logical result of evolutionary theory while quite the opposite is true of kinds.
Evolutionary biology is based on the idea that all species are derived from a common ancestor by means of gradual changes. Thus distinctions between different closely related groupings are going to be inherently blurry and often even quite arbitrary as there is no sudden transition that seperates one grouping from another.
The concept of 'kinds' however should logically result in very distinct and definite seperation being possible.
No?
Sounds either like a double standard or an excuse to avoid trying to produce evidence that was asked for. (I mean, if you have evidence for macro-evolution beyond "family", just give it rather than argue about where exactly a "kind" is defined)
The fact is that you have already quite evidently made up your mind regardless of evidence.......
However........
I suspect that there are others here capable of more technical answers in the field of genetics than I so I will restrict myself to a relatively simple (in fact intentionally simplistic) example that relies on one of the wider principles of the scientific method. Namely testable prediction.
A theory of evolution and common ancestry based on natural selection, genetic inheritence and random genetic mutation intrinsically predicts that more closely related species will have more in common genetically than those that branched off at an earlier stage. Thus very specific predictions regarding the relationships between different species can be made and verified or refuted by means of genetic research. Thus our theory is testable and verifiable.
For example: Based on embryology, vestigial limbs and the fossil record we would predict that a whale would be more genetically similar to a cow than it would be to a walrus despite many superficial morphological similarities between the walrus and the whale.
What would a theory of 'kinds' predict regarding the genetic differences between whales, walruses and cows? On what basis would it make these predictions?
™ Version 4.2