Robert Byers writes:
first there are no such things as mammals or retiles .
There are just kinds. These groups are just wrong ideas on lumping things together.
you might be surprised to know that the biblical definition of "kind" loosely matches up with a
much smaller grouping than something like
mammalia or
saurischia. as i explained many years ago in
Message 290 of the
define "kind" thread, that even though the authors of the bible were likely speaking in the vernacular, their usage
loosely lines up with the "family" level on the linnean classification system. that's above genus. so, for example, dogs, wolves, and foxes (all from the
canidae family) would all the be same "kind", but bears, skunks, otters, and racoons wouldn be separate "kinds".
Bats are indeed just flying rats. That is a real adaptation after the flood.
of course, the bible lists bats as their own "kind" (strangely grouping them with birds, leviticus 11:19). but bats,
chiroptera, are an
order, with many many families under it. same with rodents. there are many, many families of rats.
you are, essentially, proposing biblical macro-evolution.
In fact there is a common blueprint for echolocation in bats, whales etc.
two extremely distantly related animals that used the exact same form of a particular adaptation, not found in any other related species between the two, would be a wonderful falsification of evolution. it would mean that "designs" were co-opted across non-hereditary lines.
fortunately, the two systems aren't even close to homologous. bats use their ears, dolphins use a giant fatty drum at the front of their skull.
אָרַח
™ Version 4.2
(1)
