Super Evolution and the Flood

The flood was definitely not an extinction event on the "kind" level, as Noah saved pairs of all kinds. Therefore, any "kinds" in the fossil record that are clearly separate from existing modern "kinds" must be included. And fresh vegetation of the type found in the geological strata in which they are fossilized must have been grown on the Ark farm, as well, because modern catastrophological science tells us that they died in their various separate environments, hence the evo misconception of so-called billions of years and different epochs in the earth's history. So, you need extinct giant ferns for the extinct dinosaur kinds, etc.I can tell that you're probably a mere physicist, or something, not a professional catastrophologist.

I'm inclined to agree with you here. The problem with relaxing the interbreeding law is that humans and apes end up in the same kind, and Noah becomes the famed common ancestor. And we all know that in YEC circles, a "monkey" has never been known to give birth to a man, so the same must apply the other way around.Perhaps the definition of kind should be based around the idea that species of the same "kind" must have genomes more similar than humans and chimps.That might make for a very crowded Ark, though, and families like the bears and cats would probably need to be more than one kind.

There's convergent thinking as well as convergent evolution, bluejay. That exact point occured to me as I was typing the post. I was also thinking of saying that, at the rate of super-evolution we're considering, one of Noah's sons may already have had distinctly simian features, and perhaps a slight tendency to walk on all fours occasionally. Yes, but remember, YECists are trying to get together a creationist science that has the credibility to eventually be taught in schools.Noah as the common ancestor solves some difficult problems in relation to ERVs in the respective genomes, and a certain one from two fused chromosome (which, in the view of catastrophological scientists, becomes a de-fused chromosome somewhere along the line of Ham's descendants). All very neat, you see. Edited by bluegenes, : minor correction

I agree. The whole thing's supposed to be magic, so attempting scientific explanations is pointless, as magic can always be brought in to solve the problems. But, if you think this through, the same thing can be said for anything involving mysterious intelligent designers, as we can never know what level of magic they've done or are doing.So, that should help you to understand why "I.D." as well as YEC creationism doesn't make it as science.We can always make up magic explanations for anything, including super-evolution after a 4,300 year old flood. Bringing magic in used to be very popular, but it never helped our ancestors' understanding of the universe.

No errors on my part. Magic is magic.Do enlighten us as to the laws of "spiritual mechanics", and how they apply to miraculous world wide floods.I could do with a good laugh.

Meaning that there aren't any, of course.

Well spotted, and very relevant to the topic of super-evolution after the flood. You're the expert. Could "micro-evolution" have added an extra pair of legs to all species of insect in 4,000 years, and isn't the fact that they all have six now, without exception, the most remarkable piece of convergent evolution? Wasn't Noah instructed to put pairs of all land animals on the ark? I think that's the reason that AiG have to face the prospect of adding dinosaurs (and everything else in the fossil record) to the menagerie.

Since when did you stop doing that? You mean you'll never preach again?