Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Questions Creationists Never Answer-still waiting!
stonetool
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 116 (2971)
01-27-2002 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Sparticus
01-27-2002 4:13 PM


If you are committed to "kind" as species, thats fine. You should realise that by conservative estimate well over a million different species of animals. Thats a pretty tight fit on the ark !
For that reason , the Answers in Genesis folk have defined "kind" to mean genus-one taxanomic level up- in order to get a figure of 8000 pairs of animals on the ark. Even then ,they leave off all molluscs, and anthropods.According to the Bible, they presumably all perished.
And all living things that moved on the earth died, including the birds, domestic animals, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 7:22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 7:23 So the LORD destroyed every living thing that was on the surface of the ground, including people, animals, creatures that creep along the ground and birds of the sky. They were wiped off the earth. (Genesis 7:21-23).
I will leave it up to creationists to explain how these creatures are still with us.
Meanwhile, Duane Gish, Creationist Number One, has defined " basic kind " in way that includees whole classes, such as molluscs and "worms"!
I predict that there will no consistient creationist definition of "kind' in this forum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Sparticus, posted 01-27-2002 4:13 PM Sparticus has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024