Led Zeppelin
Active Member
Hello AronRa. Since this is your favorite web forum, I thought I would post this here because you say you want an answer. And it's not possible for me to say that I am actually giving you an answer without also giving you an opportunity to say whether or not I am correctly representing your question.
You often make the claim that no creationist has ever been able to give you an answer as to what a kind is. Meaning no creationist has ever explained to you what kinds are nor have they ever provided you a definition for the word kind. I know this particular video is a year old, but you do still claim this? Correct?
And with this claim, you imply there is distinction between the biblical principal of kinds and biology. Otherwise there would be no point in any of this. Correct?
So it stands to reason I should first begin by briefly addressing this distinction.
Kinds bring forth their own Kind- This is the only context in which biology is ever realized, because it is true. It is a biblical principle. Correct?
Humans and Pine Trees are related- This is a context in which biology is NEVER realized because it is conjecture. It is an AronRa principle. Correct?
I would assume you would agree with both of the above points because you more than anyone should know that phylogenetic trees are based on conjecture. With your "Phylogeny Challenge" you are basically admitting that your conjecture is not particularly useful to anyone for anything so you want Creationists to make up their own conjecture so you can basically say "Ha! That doesn't work either!"
But the difference is, we never said we could tell you what every living creature descended from. YOU DID. We told you that would not be able to. And you didn't listen.
We can't know what all of the created kinds are. The bible only generalizes them according to the domain in which they are intended to dwell in. Sky, Land, Water and Creeping. Sure, there will be exceptions to this rule but no creature will ever violate this rule in more than 1 way. And not in 50 fucking different ways like the rules used to define species. And the constraint placed upon this rule will never be violated (The Kinds will bring forth their own kind.)
I guess you could kind of define them by what they do also, AronRa. You are right. What do Bears do? They sleep in caves and eat people. So if something sleeps in a cave and eats people then I guess it must be a bear! Right? It sure the fuck is not going to be a squirrel or a dolphin! I think we can both agree on that. Correct?
Kind means Form.
Forms can be determined by the inherited characteristics which allow them to dwell within their intended domain. Because Forms will bring forth their own Form. Indeed it is the form of a creature which allows it dwell either in the land, sky or sea. Correct?
Does this tell us specifically what every created kind was or how many there were? No.
Can morphological comparisons tell you what every common ancestor is? No.
Can DNA? No.
