Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Oolon Colluphid · 07-30-2002, 07:14 AM

As usual, the thing to do is to pin the buggers down at the outset to a definition of 'kind'. Is it species, genus, family, order, class... or what?

Oolon

tgamble · 07-30-2002, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Oolon Colluphid:
<strong>As usual, the thing to do is to pin the buggers down at the outset to a definition of 'kind'. Is it species, genus, family, order, class... or what?
Oolon</strong>

Ah, but such catagories were invented by god hateing, bible bashing, christian persecuting atheistic evilutionists who rejected the truth of the biblical kind so they could live out their ammoral lifestyle.

Late_Cretaceous · 07-30-2002, 10:29 AM

It is occuring in this thread from Jfoard right now!
<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001133" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001133</a>

lpetrich · 07-30-2002, 10:55 AM

Some creationists have coined the term "baramin" for "created kind", but that has not stopped them from being very vague about how to recognize one. The only criteria I've ever seen are what the Bible calls a "kind" and what can interbreed. I remember asking Ed why he considers a "created kind" to be a Linnaean family, instead of some other Linnaean rank, but our favorite wildlife biologist ducked the question.

I've seen:

dog kind
cat kind
bear kind
deer kind
horse kind
cattle kind
frog kind
chimp kind

And some creationists reportedly consider all bacteria to be one "created kind"!

GeoTheo · 07-30-2002, 11:48 AM

As a means of scientific classification such as cladistics, kinds is pretty primitive. But to the average joe and also to the average goat herder in ancient palestine it seems pretty straight forward. That's all it was intended to mean, the God who created everything. Just a very loose categorization of how different types of animals appear at first glance. It also makes sense in normal parlance of our day. If some one were to ask a fisherman "What KIND of fish is that?" It would make perfect sense to answer that it is a Northern pike or a walleye etc.
If you answered them in latin you would not be incorrect but perhaps you would recieve a confused look.

lpetrich · 07-30-2002, 04:39 PM

GeoTheo, that is an exercise in irrelevance. I don't care about your supposed theological messages. I simply don't care. If "Goddidit" is the intended message, then that should be stated explicitly instead of in some beat-around-the-bush fashion as if one has something to hide.

More specifically, GeoTheo, you have evaded the question of how one recognizes a "created kind", a group of all organisms that share a single specially-created species of ancestors.

tgamble · 07-30-2002, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich:
<strong>More specifically, GeoTheo, you have evaded the question of how one recognizes a "created kind", a group of all organisms that share a single specially-created species of ancestors.</strong>

I'm not sure that he's claiming that one can. Remember, we've managed to corrupt his mind and bring him to the dark side.

Dark Jedi · 08-01-2002, 09:44 AM

A response I used to a very similar arguement:

"Except the lungfish, walking fish, salmander, and flying fish that is."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-30-2002, 07:14 AM	#11
Oolon Colluphid Contributor Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino Posts: 12,591	As usual, the thing to do is to pin the buggers down at the outset to a definition of 'kind'. Is it species, genus, family, order, class... or what? Oolon

07-30-2002, 10:29 AM	#13
Late_Cretaceous Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Alberta Posts: 1,049	It is occuring in this thread from Jfoard right now! <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001133" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001133</a>

07-30-2002, 10:55 AM	#14
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Some creationists have coined the term "baramin" for "created kind", but that has not stopped them from being very vague about how to recognize one. The only criteria I've ever seen are what the Bible calls a "kind" and what can interbreed. I remember asking Ed why he considers a "created kind" to be a Linnaean family, instead of some other Linnaean rank, but our favorite wildlife biologist ducked the question. I've seen: dog kind cat kind bear kind deer kind horse kind cattle kind frog kind chimp kind And some creationists reportedly consider all bacteria to be one "created kind"!

07-30-2002, 11:48 AM	#15
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	As a means of scientific classification such as cladistics, kinds is pretty primitive. But to the average joe and also to the average goat herder in ancient palestine it seems pretty straight forward. That's all it was intended to mean, the God who created everything. Just a very loose categorization of how different types of animals appear at first glance. It also makes sense in normal parlance of our day. If some one were to ask a fisherman "What KIND of fish is that?" It would make perfect sense to answer that it is a Northern pike or a walleye etc. If you answered them in latin you would not be incorrect but perhaps you would recieve a confused look.

07-30-2002, 04:39 PM	#16
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	GeoTheo, that is an exercise in irrelevance. I don't care about your supposed theological messages. I simply don't care. If "Goddidit" is the intended message, then that should be stated explicitly instead of in some beat-around-the-bush fashion as if one has something to hide. More specifically, GeoTheo, you have evaded the question of how one recognizes a "created kind", a group of all organisms that share a single specially-created species of ancestors.

08-01-2002, 09:44 AM	#18
Dark Jedi Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Afghanistan Posts: 4,666	A response I used to a very similar arguement: "Except the lungfish, walking fish, salmander, and flying fish that is."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.