Biological classification vs 'Kind'

Many times on this forum I have seen the work 'kind' used by creationists to classify organisms into groups in order to attempt to explain the biodiversity we see on earth today. This classification is central to the flood story and also central to the refutation of common ancestry.Science currently has a classification system (not without with its' own problems) however I would like to hear from a creationist:1) a clear definition of what 'kind' actually means to the creationist, and
2) where the definition of 'kind' differs from the commonly accepted scientific biological classification system.

Thread copied here from the Biological classification vs 'Kind' thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Oh god, not again! You'll never get a usable answer from creationists. The closest I've seen someone come here is Peg with her "if it can breed it's the same kind" which of course runs into numerous problems, not in the least with ring species.Anyway, good luck with your quest, my prediction is there will be no answer forthcoming.Let's see if I'm a prophet, eh?

There will be answers aplenty. However, they will all be shite.

---

Ah yes, of course. I should have put the word "usable" in there somewhere.

Even shite has its uses...

---

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

I recall an article I read regarding phasmatodea. Scientists did directly observe a "kind" becoming a new "kind" - the new "kind" from the "old kind" could not breed with each other.I will post the article when I find it. I read it in a Danish newspaper, so it might take a little time.

Interesting. Keep in mind though that there are some species of stick insects that reproduce by parthenogenesis, so "breeding" is not something they do anyway. I look forward to the article though.

I have no particular interest in phasmatodea so I did not know how they breed, except from now since you mentioned it (and I probably should look it up too)
I'm still searching for the article. Hard to find xD

Hi, Hotjer.There's been a lot of speciation work with the Phasmatodea. oi/10.1371/journal.pone.0001907]-->Here is one such paper from 2008. This sounds a lot like what you are talking about.Basically, what these researchers showed is that stick insects from the same species, but with different camouflage patterns, are favored on certain host plants, and vulnerable on others. So, natural selection eventually separates the two camouflage patterns on different host plants, and they are no longer able to interbreed, because they never come in contact with each other.Edited by AdminModulous, : fixed link

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

You need to fix that link.

Sounds like that thing. Thx, I had trouble to figure out how to search for such thing.Wouldn't that be a good way to counter-argue a person like Peg (despite the fact that she will not acknowledge anything that contradicts what she says) or is it not a proper argument because of the way they "breed"? I have very little knowledge about insects in general

Well then just pick up your Bible...Insects are: flying creeping things with four feet, with legs above their feet that they use to leap withal upon the earth.Lev 11:21-23/sacrasm

Oh I get it. Stupid me. I should also know that a bat is bird. God grant me knowledge through the bible! Never in contradiction with science!Lev 11:13-19/sarcasm

These stick insects do "breed normally" with one another. Some do it by parthenogenesis, but not all.So in this case, yes, this would be a case of one kind diverging into two different kinds (when taking Peg's definition), don't hold your hopes up for any acknowledgement on the creationists part though.