|
Author
|
Topic: Species/Kinds (for Peg...and others)
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
Message 16 of 425 (539512)
12-16-2009 11:37 AM
|
Reply to: Message 12 by Peg
12-16-2009 6:30 AM
|
|
winged creatures were obviously made in great variety and in different 'kinds' so the fact that we have ostraches and chickens and pelicans and finches etc also shows that genesis is in harmony with what we see. So then how many bird "kinds" did Noah have? Or better still how many bird "kinds" are there?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 12 by Peg, posted 12-16-2009 6:30 AM | | Peg has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 113 of 425 (539875)
12-20-2009 11:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 101 by Peg
12-20-2009 7:16 AM
|
|
So, while i'm happy to see the evidence they have found with regard to our earliest female ancestor, I dont believe the dating is accurate. Except that Mitochondial Eve was not the earliest, female ancestor, just the most recent, common female ancestor.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 101 by Peg, posted 12-20-2009 7:16 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 124 by caffeine, posted 12-22-2009 7:45 AM | | bluescat48 has not replied | | | Message 142 by Peg, posted 12-26-2009 6:23 AM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Kind
Good point. Try this. A person was talking about nylon eating bacteria, when the common creo idea was stated but "It's still a bacterium." and that it was the bacteria kind. Bacteria is a domain and if that is a kind then eukaryota would be a kind (same level, domain) which would mean that a human, jellyfish, mushroom, pine tree & amoeba would all be the same kind since they are all eukaryotes.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 128 by ZenMonkey, posted 12-23-2009 8:11 PM | | ZenMonkey has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 135 of 425 (540452)
12-25-2009 11:32 AM
|
Reply to: Message 134 by ICANT
12-25-2009 10:02 AM
|
|
Re: Kind
So no, humans are of the mankind. Squirrel monkeys are of the monkey kind. Each was created fully functional and full grown. Can you show any concrete evidence that this is so?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 134 by ICANT, posted 12-25-2009 10:02 AM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 148 of 425 (540563)
12-26-2009 10:56 AM
|
Reply to: Message 145 by Peg
12-26-2009 7:09 AM
|
|
That is how I understand it to be. As i said, Gensis does not classify animals into groups in the way scientists do today so its impossible for me to give specifics, but it does classify them into 5 broard categories: 1. sea creatures 2. winged creatures 3. domestic animal 4. wild beast 5. human This would be exactly what one would expect primitive men to postulate since they had no knowledge of animal relationships and could only go on certain external characteristics. Since that time there has been much work on relationships among animals. The bronze age listing are totally worthless in regards to the animals' relationships. ie: there is no separation between wild oxen and domestic oxen, the wild oxen were domesticated by men. All winged creatures aren't related, nor are all sea creatures related. One must realize that the men who first told these stories had limited knowledge of anything outside the Fertile Crescent and North Africa. Their stories show this. Edited by bluescat48, : sp
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 145 by Peg, posted 12-26-2009 7:09 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 152 by Peg, posted 12-26-2009 8:43 PM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 166 of 425 (540629)
12-26-2009 11:19 PM
|
Reply to: Message 161 by Peg
12-26-2009 10:20 PM
|
|
Re: Kind
the hebrew word 'kind' is literally a 'genus' Then that screws your definition up. If a kind is a genus, then lions, tigers, leopards and jaguars are the same kind. But cheetahs, ocelots, lynxes, bobcats, snow leopards, and cougars are of other kinds. On the other hand, your statement:
this is where i gets confusing because its still a bird, but its a different variety of bird You give the impression that bird is a kind which is not a genus but a class. All of the cats I listed above are of the family felidae, which is a lot lower than a class.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 161 by Peg, posted 12-26-2009 10:20 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 182 by Peg, posted 12-27-2009 4:51 AM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 185 of 425 (540681)
12-27-2009 1:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 183 by Peg
12-27-2009 6:22 AM
|
|
Re: Kind
In the 60/70s a genetist named Milislav Demerec, at Carnegie Institution in Cold Spring Harbor, New York conducted experiments using colon bacteria and Streptomycin. Do you have a link to this paper? I have not been able to acertain it on line. Also it would have been the 60s since Demerec died in 1966. Edited by bluescat48, : added line
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 183 by Peg, posted 12-27-2009 6:22 AM | | Peg has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 367 of 425 (542157)
01-08-2010 12:04 AM
|
Reply to: Message 360 by ICANT
01-07-2010 3:51 PM
|
|
Re: Kind
Why do we need taxonomy? Can you think of any other way to classify millions of species?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 360 by ICANT, posted 01-07-2010 3:51 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 373 of 425 (542550)
01-10-2010 5:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 372 by ICANT
01-10-2010 4:12 PM
|
|
Re: Kind
The whale would be a sea serpent kind. So what else is in the sea-serpent kind?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 372 by ICANT, posted 01-10-2010 4:12 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2