Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8950 total)
30 online now:
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,177 Year: 22,213/19,786 Month: 776/1,834 Week: 276/500 Day: 39/65 Hour: 2/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biological classification vs 'Kind'
killinghurts
Member (Idle past 3335 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 1 of 385 (562127)
05-25-2010 9:14 PM


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.


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 8:02 AM killinghurts has not yet responded
 Message 23 by Peepul, posted 05-28-2010 10:40 AM killinghurts has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12653
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 2 of 385 (562166)
05-26-2010 7:57 AM


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

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 637 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 3 of 385 (562167)
05-26-2010 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by killinghurts
05-25-2010 9:14 PM


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?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by killinghurts, posted 05-25-2010 9:14 PM killinghurts has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by hooah212002, posted 05-26-2010 8:12 AM Huntard has responded
 Message 7 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 9:15 AM Huntard has responded
 Message 383 by Carel, posted 07-02-2010 4:32 AM Huntard has responded

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 4 of 385 (562169)
05-26-2010 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Huntard
05-26-2010 8:02 AM


my prediction is there will be no answer forthcoming.

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


"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 8:02 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 8:19 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 637 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 5 of 385 (562171)
05-26-2010 8:19 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by hooah212002
05-26-2010 8:12 AM


hooah212002 writes:

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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by hooah212002, posted 05-26-2010 8:12 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Parasomnium, posted 05-26-2010 8:31 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 1038 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 6 of 385 (562173)
05-26-2010 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Huntard
05-26-2010 8:19 AM


Manure?
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 8:19 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
hotjer
Member (Idle past 2886 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 7 of 385 (562177)
05-26-2010 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Huntard
05-26-2010 8:02 AM


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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 8:02 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 9:43 AM hotjer has responded
 Message 10 by Blue Jay, posted 05-26-2010 11:03 AM hotjer has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 637 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 8 of 385 (562178)
05-26-2010 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by hotjer
05-26-2010 9:15 AM


hotjer writes:

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.


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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 9:15 AM hotjer has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 9:48 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
hotjer
Member (Idle past 2886 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 9 of 385 (562179)
05-26-2010 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Huntard
05-26-2010 9:43 AM


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 9:43 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1039 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 10 of 385 (562184)
05-26-2010 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by hotjer
05-26-2010 9:15 AM


Hi, Hotjer.

There's been a lot of speciation work with the Phasmatodea.

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 9:15 AM hotjer has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-26-2010 12:23 PM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply
 Message 12 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 4:55 PM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 385 (562190)
05-26-2010 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Blue Jay
05-26-2010 11:03 AM


You need to fix that link.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Blue Jay, posted 05-26-2010 11:03 AM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply

  
hotjer
Member (Idle past 2886 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 12 of 385 (562203)
05-26-2010 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Blue Jay
05-26-2010 11:03 AM


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Blue Jay, posted 05-26-2010 11:03 AM Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-26-2010 5:02 PM hotjer has responded
 Message 15 by Huntard, posted 05-26-2010 5:18 PM hotjer has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 385 (562204)
05-26-2010 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by hotjer
05-26-2010 4:55 PM


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 4:55 PM hotjer has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 5:09 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
hotjer
Member (Idle past 2886 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 14 of 385 (562205)
05-26-2010 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by New Cat's Eye
05-26-2010 5:02 PM


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-26-2010 5:02 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 637 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 15 of 385 (562207)
05-26-2010 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by hotjer
05-26-2010 4:55 PM


hotjer writes:

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"?


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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by hotjer, posted 05-26-2010 4:55 PM hotjer has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by caffeine, posted 05-27-2010 4:05 AM Huntard has 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