EvC Forum: Question about "kinds"

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Question about "kinds"

bluescat48

Member (Idle past 4219 days)

Posts: 2347

From: United States

Joined: 10-06-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 16 of 33 (559655)
05-10-2010 11:02 PM

Reply to: Message 13 by Peg
05-10-2010 10:07 PM

Re: Just a clarification?

two animals could breed, they were the same kind/family/genus. If they cannot breed, then they are not the same kind/family/genus.

Which brings it back to species. Whether genus or family, members of different species cannot mate and form viable offspring, even those that can produce offspring such as ligons & tigons ( lion & tiger matings), the offspring are mules (sterile hybrids).

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 13 by Peg, posted 05-10-2010 10:07 PM		Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 17 by Peg, posted 05-11-2010 3:17 AM		bluescat48 has replied

bluescat48

Member (Idle past 4219 days)

Posts: 2347

From: United States

Joined: 10-06-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 23 of 33 (559722)
05-11-2010 9:02 AM

Reply to: Message 17 by Peg
05-11-2010 3:17 AM

Re: Just a clarification?

with the ancient definition, there could actually be many species within the one kind. ie, lion, tiger, jaguar, pantha, leopard, cheetah, lynx etc etc etc, If these could all be interbred to produce offspring, then they would all be classed as one 'kind

The point is that they can't. Sterile hybrids can't mate so there could be no continuation of these.

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 17 by Peg, posted 05-11-2010 3:17 AM		Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 27 by Peg, posted 05-11-2010 9:08 PM		bluescat48 has not replied

bluescat48

Member (Idle past 4219 days)

Posts: 2347

From: United States

Joined: 10-06-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 33 of 33 (559977)
05-12-2010 11:00 AM

Reply to: Message 30 by Peg
05-12-2010 6:35 AM

Re: and become many ... species? /\edited/\

but its still accepted that a clade will eventually become something completely different, such as a dinosaur to a bird

???

Yes but they are still from the same clad. one could call the birds a subclad and the different families of birds as smaller subclades. That is what speciation is. descent with modification.

as Mr. Jack said:

Birds are dinosaurs, just as they are tetrapods, vertebrates, chordates, bilatera and eukaryotes. And just as you are a primate, a mammal, a tetrapod, a vertebrate, a chordate, bilatera and a eukaryote.

Clades track ancestory not current proporties of an organism.

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 30 by Peg, posted 05-12-2010 6:35 AM		Peg has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

3 online now:	dwise1, PaulK, Percy (Admin)
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,907 Year: 4,164/9,624 Month: 1,035/974 Week: 362/286 Day: 5/13 Hour: 0/2