Hi, Chuck! I think I've found a small problem with your "bird kind." The main textbook on "kinds" has this passage:
13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, 14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind; 15Every raven after his kind; 16And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, 17And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, 18And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, 19And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. - Leviticus 11
All except maybe one of those are feathered and bipedal, so they are birds. But there are "kinds" within the hawks, kites, and herons, and the implication is that swans or lapwings are also "kinds."
And you say, "
I guess the definition I would use to describe a "kind" would be a group of living organisms having descended from the same ancestral gene pool."
So, contrary to Mazzy's assertions, all of Hominidae are one kind, correct? Humans, bonobos, gorillas.....?
"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken
™ Version 4.2
