|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: "Best" evidence for evolution. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes I think all birds should be regarded as a species, and all the different kinds of birds as subspecies or varieties. I think that reflects the original creation most clearly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yeah I don't think Linnaeus got it all right either. He split the birds into species where I would make them all one species for instance. Unless a term like "Family" should be used the way I use Species I don't see any need for any taxonomic categories other than Species and Subspecies.
And yes I do think trilobites are all one species. I consider a species to be the original created Kind by the way. I think it should be possible to determine it morphologically. It preceded the ToE but the confusions are now because of the ToE. IMHO. I haven't tried to sort through all the categories but I did ponder the Linnaean system fairly recently. Maybe you missed it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You said I hadn't given any thought to it, and I answered that have. I think you forgot the context.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
True, I don't think it's as hard as they make it out to be, except in a few very difficult cases. To split birds into separate species is really indefensible because they are so easily identified as birds, there's not much difficulty there. Penguins and ostriches might be a problem but isn't it a very birdy-looking bird Linnaeus made into a separate species?
Yeah I guess it does look easier to me than they claim. As for trilobites, THEY are the ones who named the weirdest looking ones "trilobite" and since I can see why I just collapse them into one Species. Yes I'm a very astonishing person, I agree. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Neither of your examples is a bird. Do I get an A?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
They don't have the morphology of birds, didn't I say that's the criterion? They don't have the shape, the head, the beak, the feathers, the kind of wings etc etc etc. I already discussed birds somewhere.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I wouldn't have a problem with the basic method. except I discovered on the Linnaean chart a couple of categories I thought were wrong, separating out the thrush as if it were some special species of bird from all the other birds or something like that being one such instance that didn't seem to make any sense. And of course as a Creationist I don't put the creatures in Families above the Species, or I would make the Family the equivalent of the Species, but worse than that Linnaeus puts creatures in Families that are entirely different Kinds in my thinking from the Species he arranges beneath the Family. Something like that. The point is that I don't object to the basic idea but I do object to some of the specifics I found on his chart.
It would be a big project but some time I could try to go through the whole Linnean chart to compare it with how I understand the Kinds. TGhere would certainly be some creatures I'm not familiar with so I could only go so far with it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Making the thrush into a separate family separates it from other birds that seem to have all the same morphological characteristics. If not, what is the difference?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I've been looking for the chart I used before and I can't find it. It was very clear and easy to read and now I can't find it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm only interested in the Aves at the moment, what's your problem?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Thanks but I need to find the chart I used before.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Arrogant narcissism seems to be defined these days as disagreeing with the establishment, in my case the ToE and the Old Earth, in Ttump's case the Waashington political Swamp.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I don't know if I'll ever "do anything about" anything I think. I go on thinking about it nevertheless. If I run across the chart I saw it may prompt me to think some more.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You think that just thinking something is the same as proving it. In some cases I do think describing the thought serves as an argument. If it doesn't persuade I'm happy to have had the thought for my own purposes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Without the chart to look at I don't know what anyone is talking about and don't remember my own impressions when I saw it. I vaguely remember I had a question about how the birds were categorized, which indluded something about the way the thrushes were separated from other birds, but other questions as well. Since my interest is in figuring out how to define the Kind of Biblical Creationism, at the moment the Bird Kind, I'm certainly not going to be connecting birds with reptiles.
Cheers. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024