AronRa's challenge, which are related? Which are created?

[PhilNEvo]

Creationists seem to have identified some clades they consider created~

http://creation.com/sparrow-finch-baramin
http://creation.com/a-baraminology-tutorial-with-examples-from-the-grasses-poaceae
http://creation.com/identification-of-species-within-the-cattle-monobaramin-kind
http://creation.com/genetic-diversity-in-dogs
http://creation.com/identification-of-species-within-the-sheep-goat-kind-tsoan-monobaramin

So, what are your thoughts, everyone?

 

[DutchLiam84]

Re: AronRa's challenge, which are related? Which are created

Have they defined "kind" in a biological context yet?

 

[Frenger]

Re: AronRa's challenge, which are related? Which are created

Just reading about Bariminology and have so far come across this.

For example, we know that whales share no ancestry with land mammals (Gen. 1:20-21).

And.....

"Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds[a] fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens." 21 So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Where as...

Both morphological1 and molecular2 studies indicate that cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) and artiodactyls (even-toed ungulates, which include pigs, hippos, camels and ruminants) form a clade or monophyletic group , that is, they have a common ancestor that is not shared by any other group of mammals. This is counter-intuitive, because it implies that a cow is more closely related to a dolphin or a whale than to a horse, yet it is one of the best examples of congruence between morphological and molecular estimates of mammalian phylogeny

Well, I don't know who to believe.

Virginia study - http://faculty.virginia.edu/bio202/202-2002/Lectures 20202/thewissen et al 1997.pdf

[edit] I do realise the study makes clear the evidence "indicates" a common ancestry, I am not asserting it as a fact.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Re: AronRa's challenge, which are related? Which are created

Creationists seem to have identified some clades they consider created~

http://creation.com/sparrow-finch-baramin
http://creation.com/a-baraminology-tutorial-with-examples-from-the-grasses-poaceae
http://creation.com/identification-of-species-within-the-cattle-monobaramin-kind
http://creation.com/genetic-diversity-in-dogs
http://creation.com/identification-of-species-within-the-sheep-goat-kind-tsoan-monobaramin

So, what are your thoughts, everyone?

They are wrong.

 

[Laurens]

Re: AronRa's challenge, which are related? Which are created

So all other clades evolved then did they?

 

[Squawk]

Re: AronRa's challenge, which are related? Which are created

Always amusing to see creationists make actual statements, since it takes about 15 seconds to show the idiocy. But no matter.

One thing that has always puzzled me is why people find it difficult to accept that a cow is more closely related to a whale than a horse. I suppose on the surface I can see how it might be hard to accept since cows and horses are banded together in childhood literature, but I just look to the hippo and manatee. I'd suggest a cow is far similar to either of those two than it is to a horse, and it's not a long leap from either to a whale. It might be, intuitively, more of a leap from a cow to a whale than from a cow to a horse, but if you apply an intermediate to the reasoning (ignoring all evidence), I find it to be reasonably obvious (obvious in a confirmation bias kinda way).