KINDS and ADAPTATION

[Donray]

EarthScienceguy wrote:

I believe in adaptation not evolution. Adaptation says that organisms change because of heredity not mutations.

God created kinds of animals. So yes He only created one species of humans.


In another topic when I asked EarthScienceguy what he believed instead of evolution he wrote back the above. I asked him several times to explin his theory and he incapable of explanation and debate of his theory.
I would like to find from any Christians that believes like EarthScienceguy something about this belief and some proof using known fossils and how these fit in.
How do you explain Homo neanderthalensis (the Neanderthal) and The Denisovans that both had sex with modern humans? If you are from Europe for your background you have some Neanderthal DNA.

Since this theory uses “kinds of animals� that a lot of creationist do could someone list all the kinds that were on the ark and then the list of animals, insects, bacteria, etc that these kinds adapted into. Are you with a lot of the undereducated people that think the world is less then 10K years old?

What is adaptation and not evolution? Does it have anything to due with DNA changing? Could someone point out all the articles that support this theory? I would hope that there is a list of science articles that shows your science of adaptation of kinds on the ARK to all the diversity we have.

I would like to have a debate on this theory since Christians like to debate evolution we should have this debate also.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 77 by EarthScienceguy]

Your quotes do not indicate they do not believe in evolution. In fact, if you actually read them, they indicate they DO believe in evolution; they are simply discussing some of its limitations or non applicability.

Re: humans being primates, you appear to be confused. All humans are primates; not all primates are human.

"Primates
Primate, in zoology, any mammal of the group that includes the lemurs, lorises, tarsiers, monkeys, apes, and humans."
https://www.britannica.com/topic-browse ... s/Primates

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 76 by EarthScienceguy]

So this mutation is not an example of evolution, all of the examples you have given so far are not examples of evolution.

Wrong, again. You can't just declare something to be the way you want it to be regardless of physical evidence. Evolution has been proven to be a valid theory over and over again, and your refusal to accept it doesn't make it false. The adaptation of humans to high altitudes is a perfect example of evolution in action, in humans, on a relatively short time scale. Simply declaring that it isn't does not change this fact. You consistently ignore facts, then claim that you only deal in facts. This tactic isn't fooling anyone here. The only support you've provided for your demonstrably wrong views on evolution and taxonomy (and other subjects) are simple unsupported declarations which represent your own opinion. You've never backed them up with facts.

Same with humans being primates. Humans ARE primates by definition. It is not something you can simply declare to be false just because you don't like it, or it contradicts your religious position. The fact that the human brain has evolved into a very complex and capable organ (this brain evolution IS our major evolutionary difference from other primates), while the brain of other primates have not, is completely irrelevant and unrelated to the classification of humans as primates. You don't seem to understand what taxonomic classifications are and how they are defined. Homo sapiens are mammals, and they are primates. Chimpanzees are mammals, and they are primates. But chimpanzees are not members of the genus Homo. Here are a couple of links that might help clear up your misunderstandings of basic taxonomy, and what a primate is (actual definitions, not personal opinions).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(biology)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate

[Danmark]

That is not what these biologist think

Dr Marc Kirschner, founding chair of the Department of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School stated: “In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.� As quoted in the Boston Globe, 23 October 2005

Wrong again. You are quoting out of context; quote mining.

"Gene expression and modulation of protein function in development. Although much is known about the conservation and variation in DNA and protein structure, the most important evolution happens at the level of developmental pathways and strategies."
https://sysbio.med.harvard.edu/marc-kirschner

"So, you may want to rethink your statement."

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 81 by Danmark]

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO CAROLUS LINNAEUS'S CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. No creationist subscribes to the Linnaeus's classification system, we simply use it as a point of reference between creation theory and uniformitarian. We do recognize the similarity in different species but theorize these as deviations from the from the from the original kind that was created.

In the Biblical classification system man stands alone as God's special creation, as evidenced by the special characteristics that man has.

So believe what you will. There is no observable avenue for a primate to become a man with all of the special characteristics that man has therefore man stands alone in the classification system.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 79 by postroad]

Do you also believe in a flat earth?

No because Isaiah 40:22 says, "It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in."

Job 26:7 says, "He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing."

Yes indeed, the Bible contradicts itself, especially if you insist on taking it literally. There are many verses that confirm the various authors of the Bible thought the Earth flat.

1 Chronicles 16:30
30 Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.

1 Samuel 2:8
8 He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap; he seats them with princes and has them inherit a throne of honor. “For the foundations of the earth are the LORD’s; on them he has set the world.

Isaiah 11:12
12 He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the exiles of Israel; he will assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth.

Job 28:24
24 for he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens.

Job 37:3
3 He unleashes his lightning beneath the whole heaven and sends it to the ends of the earth.

Matthew 4:8
8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.

Psalm 75:3
3 When the earth and all its people quake, it is I who hold its pillars firm.

Psalm 104:5
5 He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.

Revelation 7:1
1 After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree.

Not believing in evolution is the equivalent of believing the Earth is flat, has corners, and sits unmoved on a foundation of pillars.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 80 by EarthScienceguy]

A circle isn't s sphere and a seal was rolled over a flat surface of clay or wax.

Perhaps we could continue this in the thread I started?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 83 by Danmark]

"Gene expression and modulation of protein function in development. Although much is known about the conservation and variation in DNA and protein structure, the most important evolution happens at the level of developmental pathways and strategies."

He is saying here exactly what he said in my quote. "Developmental, pathways and strategies" is evolutionary biology.

He is not a creationist. He just does see the need of evolutionary thought in most of biology.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 81 by Danmark]

I DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO CAROLUS LINNAEUS'S CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. No creationist subscribes to the Linnaeus's classification system

Of course you don't, "Science Guy." And maybe the entire band is out of step with you. Why cite anything at all from science, since you don't believe in it?
Maybe you should change your name to "EarthBibleguy."
Why use the word "primate" at all, since it's from that 'science stuff.'

BTW, how old IS the Earth, EarthBibleguy? According to the begats in Genesis it's about 6023 years old.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/hi ... day-earth/

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 85 by Danmark]

None of these say that the Earth is flat. Isaiah 40 talks about the Earth being a circle in which a sphere is.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 89 by EarthScienceguy]

It's amazing then that till fairly recently the Spirit saw fit to instruct Bible reader that the earth was flat based on their interpretation of the texts.