Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2019 2:49 PM
29 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, edge, JonF, PaulK, RAZD, ringo, Tangle, Theodoric (9 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,830 Year: 9,866/19,786 Month: 2,288/2,119 Week: 324/724 Day: 49/114 Hour: 1/3

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Species/Kinds (for Peg...and others)
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 3115 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009

Message 123 of 425 (540094)
12-22-2009 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Peg
12-16-2009 6:30 AM

Hi Peg

I joined this discussion late, so apologies if this has already been covered somewhere in the discussion. I just wanted to respond to your following statement because it raises a point I always find curious.

It is clearly stated that many bird species were created, not just one wild and one domestic.

What do you mean by "birds" when you say "many bird species were created". Or, indeed, what do you mean when you talk about "primates" or "reptiles" or "fish" or "rodents" or "molluscs" or "mammals", etc? What do those group words mean if you don't think they signify a form of relationship? If you think that all species or "kinds" were created entirely independently, then presumably a penguin is not related in any way to an ostrich. So what does it mean to classify either of them as a "bird"? Is a penguin not more similar to a seal than it is to an ostrich or a robin?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Peg, posted 12-16-2009 6:30 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Peg, posted 12-26-2009 7:09 AM Jumped Up Chimpanzee has responded

Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 3115 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009

Message 330 of 425 (541513)
01-04-2010 4:41 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Peg
12-26-2009 7:09 AM

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

So will you now be consistent and always stick to using the above group definitions, rather than using words such as "birds" which are meaningless if you really believe that a robin is no more related to an ostrich or a penquin than it is to a fly or a bat?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Peg, posted 12-26-2009 7:09 AM Peg has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019