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.

[Donray]

Still Small wrote “My apologies for assuming that you might do a little research for yourself. The bear kind can be traced back to the oldest genus, the Ursavus. Here is a link which gives somewhat of an explanation, (though going beyond the actual physical evidence so as to align it with ToE).�

Why would I try to research your creation ideas? You should be able to supply whatever I need. But I will you ask you for a book that explains creation as accepted by at least 80% of your creationists. It better have a timeline and have all the fossils explained where they fall on the timeline. It should include a total restart of all animals and plats with the flood and again the timeline of the kinds on the ark to present known animals and insects.

Know how about a discussion of Ursavus.

Ursavus is an extinct genus of bear that existed in North America, Europe, and Asia during the Miocene, about 23–5.3 million years ago (Mya), existing for roughly 17.7 million years.[2][3] The genus apparently dispersed from Asia into North America about 20 Mya, becoming the earliest member of the subfamily Ursinae in the New World.[4] Qiu points out that if a questionable 29 million-year-old specimen of Ursavus reported in North America is validated, Ursavus may have evolved in North America and dispersed westward into Asia. The higher number of fossils in Europe grading toward eastern Asia make the westward dispersal unlikely.

So, your god created this bear KIND in North America 23 million years ago. You agree with that? I have asked you for a timeline many times and your are incapable of giving one. You cannot even guess when your god created the original garden and had Adam name all the animals. Now you are saying the Adam and the garden was in North America? Is this where all the KINDS were created? Or did your god create animal KJINDS all over the world?
Let’s take an older KIND. What was the original KIND of reptile that dinosaurs adapted from?
Also, since you belive in the flood myth could you tell me the bear kind that went on the ark and trace the current bears from the bear kind on a tree and timeline?

You should be very capable of answering these questions about your beliefs.

So, are you going to continue the discussion or give up because you don’t know the answers? Just trying to figure what you creationists actually know beside trying to discredit science.

[Donray]

Mr Still Small: Did you give up on discussing your creation ideas? You only have the answer "my god did it by magic and I don't know anything about how?"

[Donray]

It appears that creationist cannot logically discuss their idea. At least The God did not do it people can discuss how evolution works and back it with facts and proofs.

The creationists have no idea what their god did not how to explin it.

Here is an explanation of how bears evolved. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep46487

I would expect a similar paper on the creationist view.

Of course Still Small does not want to continue the debate. Of course in the future he and the other creationists will just try to knock science and replace it with MAGIC. Their god is the ultimate magician is what they come back with instead of a logical discussion.

[Goat]

(Relocated from “The Myth of radioactive dating.� thread)

OK, how about you presenting any kind of experiment that proves:
1: Your god exists.
2: The material that your god created the universe from.
3: What you god is made of.
4: How your gods brain works and what material it is made from.
5: From what material did your god create life.

Keep in mind that you need experimental proof before =you belive in stuff.

So, bet you come up with nothing but your bible to supply proof.

If by ‘experiment’ you mean producing evidence via an experiment which follows the principles of the scientific method, I’m afraid that cannot be done. Why? Because scientific experiments, as does science itself, can only investigate the 4D space-time which we refer to as the physical universe. God, the Creator of the physical universe, as such cannot be investigated scientifically as He is not part of the physical universe. For Him to be so would require the existence of the physical universe prior to His creating it. God is metaphysical or supernatural. I don’t mean in a spooky sense but rather being ‘beyond the physical’ or ‘beyond the natural’. Naturalistic materialists only accept the existence of the physical realm, whereas I also accept the possibility of the metaphysical realm. Hence my prior statement - “So, again, Donray (& others), you are asking me to explain how a supernatural/metaphysical Creator God supernaturally/metaphysically created the universe and all living creatures but you’ll only accept mechanisms which are natural/physical explanations. And again, good luck with that one.�

Again, you want experiments so supply some that back up your mythical creation ideas.

No, you appear to misunderstand my point being that you (and others) as naturalistic materialists, insist upon scientific evidence from repeatable experimentation as per the scientific method. Yet, you appear to accept ‘by faith’ (without evidence) the naturalistic creation of the two basics of existence, being the entire physical universe and life itself. To some that may appear somewhat hypocritical.

PS: You have never explained how your Kind and Adaptation works. You gave an example of a bear kind that evolved into all the current bear types. You never said what the original bear type looked like, where its fossil evidence is, etc. So no you did not answer my question.

My apologies for assuming that you might do a little research for yourself. The bear kind can be traced back to the oldest genus, the Ursavus. Here is a link which gives somewhat of an explanation, (though going beyond the actual physical evidence so as to align it with ToE).

You again supplied links to try to dis prove evolution. I asked you to prove your idea of Kinds and adaptation. Gives timeframes about your bear and trace its adaptation with fossil evidence that explains your time frame.

The links I provided, which you appear not to have read, were scientific research papers which actually explain adaptation via the process known as epigenetics. Is this not what you wanted? Though, if they raise doubts or disprove ToE, so be it, we must follow the evidence where it leads.

YOU NEVER HAVE GIVEN ANY TIME FRAME FROM ANY OF YOUR MYTHICAL CREATION IDEAS.

Oh . . . sorry, the original bear kind was created on Day 6 of the Creation Week approximately 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. Approximately 1,500 years later, a pair (male and female) of the original bear kind entered the Ark and commenced reproducing 1 year later upon leaving the Ark. As the bear kind migrated to different environments, they adapted via epigenetics, giving rise to the various species we see today.

Have a good day!
Still small

You are making a claim that there is a 'beyond the physical'. Can you show that to be true? How do you know, and how can you show me that this claim is true?

[Still small]

[Replying to Goat]

Goat,
To save repeating myself, in regards to your question about ‘things’ beyond the physical, you may like to read my reply in
A Universe from Nothing ....Post 91

Have a good day!
Still small

[Donray]

Still Small cannot prove his god exists and yet tries to use pseudoscience to disprove things that show his god is a myth.

He refuses yo debate me about his belief in KINDS and ADAPTATIONS.

All Still Small like most Christians can only rely on his mystical sky gods magic to say "I don't know anything about my god except his magic is all powerful and that explins everything I need to know."

[Still small]

Why would I try to research your creation ideas?

Why? So as to have a full or, at least, a better understanding of that which you appear to delight in attacking. So far, all you seem to do is attack your self-made ‘strawmen’. To have an intelligent ‘debate’, one needs to have, at the very least, a basic understanding of the opponent’s position so as to avoid looking foolish. Therefore, you should do a little research.

You should be able to supply whatever I need. But I will you ask you for a book that explains creation as accepted by at least 80% of your creationists. It better have a timeline and have all the fossils explained where they fall on the timeline. It should include a total restart of all animals and plats with the flood and again the timeline of the kinds on the ark to present known animals and insects.

I have linked for your benefit an article, A Theory of Creation which explains briefly the Theory of Creation plus contains a list of books where a more detailed explanation is given. I suggest you read the article, along with the attached links and footnotes*. Then you may also improve your understanding by obtaining and reading one or more of the listed books. Please note, as stated in the article -
“Some of the most vocal opponents of creationary thought, ostensibly repulsed by the work involved in objectively studying the technical details of an unfamiliar matter, persist in demanding something like a one- or two-sentence “theory of creation� [preferrably subservient to their naturalistic presuppositions].  Their insistence on such a simplistic approach to both evolution and creation has its reasons:  Evolution appears more credible when essential technical details remain beyond scrutiny, whereas creation finds its most compelling substantiation in technical, detailed analyses of actual empirical data and scientifically sound principles vis-a-vis both perspectives.�

Know how about a discussion of Ursavus.

Ursavus is an extinct genus of bear that existed in North America, Europe, and Asia during the Miocene, about 23–5.3 million years ago (Mya), existing for roughly 17.7 million years.[2][3] The genus apparently dispersed from Asia into North America about 20 Mya, becoming the earliest member of the subfamily Ursinae in the New World.[4] Qiu points out that if a questionable 29 million-year-old specimen of Ursavus reported in North America is validated, Ursavus may have evolved in North America and dispersed westward into Asia. The higher number of fossils in Europe grading toward eastern Asia make the westward dispersal unlikely.

It would appear that this paragraph is purely a ‘cut’n’paste’, judging by the footnote references, yet you have failed to provide a citation reference or link. Can you please do so in order that I may check the context of the quoted section. This is due, partly, to the fact that this reference apparently implies a timeframe for Ursavus extending back 23 million years whereas the link provided in -

Here is an explanation of how bears evolved. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep46487

- indicates that Ursavus evolved only in the last 5 million years - “Ursine bears are the largest living terrestrial carnivores and have evolved during the last five million years, attaining a wide geographical distribution range.�
This second article also highlights the complexity of the bears’ evolutionary history which is often complicated and, at times, conflicting due to the gene flow between species. This is understandable when one tries to interpret the data from a purely uniformitarian ‘mutation and natural selection’ perspective. Though, what this paper highlights is exactly what one would expect from an epigenetics adaptation perspective that I have discussed before.

So, your god created this bear KIND in North America 23 million years ago. You agree with that?

No, this is what you have claimed (from an unreferenced citation), not me. Besides, when God created the original bear kind, North America was not North America. You may need to brush up on your understanding of the resulting affects of a catastrophic flood and plate tectonics. (It may also help you to understand the cause of the resulting Ice Age. - if you wish, I can provide links to a number of papers, though, I sincerely doubt you would bother to read them but the offer is there.)

I have asked you for a timeline many times and your are incapable of giving one. You cannot even guess when your god created the original garden and had Adam name all the animals.

I believe I did so at the end of Post 335 or is this simply just another incidence of you failing to read replies to your requests.

Now you are saying the Adam and the garden was in North America? Is this where all the KINDS were created? Or did your god create animal KJINDS all over the world?

Again this idea of North America is your strawman argument, not mine.

Let’s take an older KIND. What was the original KIND of reptile that dinosaurs adapted from?

How about we just stick with the bear kind for now, as you already appear quite confused. Also, before we change directions, I have a few questions to post for you regarding your beliefs in order to make comparisons between our differing perspectives.

Also, since you belive in the flood myth could you tell me the bear kind that went on the ark and trace the current bears from the bear kind on a tree and timeline?

As they didn’t have their name tags on indicating species, you’ll have to wait until I can locate the passenger manifest.

You should be very capable of answering these questions about your beliefs.

So, are you going to continue the discussion or give up because you don’t know the answers? Just trying to figure what you creationists actually know beside trying to discredit science.

I believe I have already answered several of your questions, though you appear to have totally ignored them. You may recall, (if indeed you actually bothered to read it) my last paragraph in Post 12. Let me ‘refresh’ your memory -
“If by ‘debate’ you mean an open-minded discussion, I’m happy to be involved. But if you mean an outright ‘blue’ (argument) with the intent of ridicule, negativity and abuse (as is the habit of some posters on these boards), then I see no point. We’ll just have to wait and see.�

So far, you appear to have either failed to read or understand my posting or denied their existence. I, too, am trying to figure what you actually know, which to this point appears to be very little. So, are you going to discuss the topic and reply to my actual posts or are you just going to continue making up your own strawman arguments to knock down because you have no real answers? My patience is wearing thin and I may just have to ignore your pointless and misleading posts.

Have a good day!
Still small

(*The link in footnote 5 has changed. It is now The Textual Reliability of the New Testament.)

[Donray]

[Replying to post 344 by Still small]

The link you gave sounds like Darwin's evolution by natural selection. My question to you was did your god control evolution?????? Yes or no will be fine.

No, you do not answer my questions.

Lets take your 5 million years of the god making the original bear like animal. Then you are not a creationist that thinks the world was created only recently but at least 5 million years ago. Is the correct?

I cannot figure out you creation myth timeline and you have never given a timeline. When according to you was the earth created? If I read genesis it describes creating a flat earth with a dome of stars. So again can you give me timeline of your creation myth or at least some article that details a timeline and how known fossils fit in. The only date from you so far is five million when your god created the animals and therefore Adam (since he named the animals).

When was the flood? What animals were on the ark? This is very important if you want to discuss creation versus you just trying to discredit science. So your answer of "I know nothing about the flood that how evolution worked after the flood." does not help. You need to discuss the migration and adaptation after the flood. What kind of bears did all the bears adapt from after the flood?

I need to know your beliefs since they differ from other creationist. You are ok with initial creation happening over 5 million years ago but others are not.

The LINK you had me read on bears does not show the break in evolution for a restart on a flood. So, does that mean you don't belive in the flood myth? Very confusing,. So do you belive in the flood myth? If so, why present an Link the does not show the flood interruption in bears?

You confuse me and most likely others. Could you please provide some answers??????

[Diagoras]

I have linked for your benefit an article, A Theory of Creation which explains briefly the Theory of Creation plus contains a list of books where a more detailed explanation is given.

I did follow the link to that article, as you suggested.

Paragraph 1 (“Feigned(?) Ignorance�) is basically an ad hominem attack against one particular group of people at a particular website. It does absolutely nothing to present any scientific theory. So already, we’re off to a poor start.

From paragraph 2 (“What is a Scientific Theory?�):

The naturalism embraced by most evolutionists is strictly an anti-supernatural belief system, a form of practical atheism.  It is not, by definition, any more or less “scientific� than any other belief system, including one that allows for a Creator-God.

This should raise an immediate red flag to any general reader, particularly when their own definition of “science� is:

systematized knowledge derived from observation, study and experimentation carried on in order to determine the nature or principles of what is being studied

<bolding mine>

A common tactic used by some creationists is to create an equivalence between a belief system and scientific enquiry, by either labelling science as a ‘belief system’, or by labelling creationist theory as science (often using the phrase ‘scientific history’). Good scientific theory simply follows the observable evidence. It’s not ‘anti’ anything, and indeed - if done properly - actively tries to falsify its own theories rather than fit evidence to a preconceived idea. The argument here demonstrates a false equivalency fallacy.

While perhaps only a minority of evolutionists would count themselves as atheists, most tend to argue to exclude or severely limit the idea of a Creator-God.  “Since God cannot be subjected to the process of scientific discovery,� they reason, “the possibility of any direct action on His part must be excluded from the realm of science.�

This is a straw-man fallacy, as it’s putting a weak argument into quotes as if it were the general view of evolutionary scientists, which it certainly isn’t.

In their view, a viable alternative to evolution must satisfy the evolutionists’ criterion (i.e., philosophical naturalism) in order to avoid rejection—by philosophical naturalists!

Another straw-man fallacy. The criteria for any successful theory of evolution are only that it accurately and fully explains observations of species change over time. Not that it conforms to any particular philosophy. I’d encourage readers to look at this article which quotes one of my most valued books (“The Demon-haunted World�) on what a proper scientific ‘toolkit’ (or mindset) looks like:

https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/0 ... arl-sagan/

Later on in the paragraph, there’s a table comparing creationist and scientific characteristics. In the last row, they compare ‘Primary means of criticizing
 counterpart system� and the table footnote adds:

...evolutionists’ out-of-hand dismissal of the creation paradigm is due more to their own tightly held religious predispositions...

We see yet another ad hominem attack, and an attribution of ‘religious predispositions’ to scientists where none exist, while at the same time claiming ‘citation of empirical data’ for themselves. The evidence of their own table in fact supports the very opposite conclusion to the creationist view.

In summary, it’s taken me some considerable time to properly absorb and consider just the introduction in this article, and I have found it to be riddled with fallacies. However, in the spirit of fairness, I will continue reading it when I have more time, and post some more of my thoughts.

[Still small]

The link you gave sounds like Darwin's evolution by natural selection.

Hmmm, do you know what ‘Darwin's evolution by natural selection’ (ToE) means ? Let’s have a look. Just as an example, Table 2 of the link was a comparison of the Theory of Creation (ToC) and the Theory of Evolution (ToE). Now look at one area of comparison -
Complexity, Variety and Adaptability in Living Organisms and Ecological Systems. [7]
- ToC - Inherent and complete in original populations as created; manifested (and subject to degradation) over time through genetic variation and natural selection.
- ToE - Increased over time from zero via DNA copying errors (i.e., mutations), natural selection, and millions of years.
Note the [7] after the section title which refers to a footnote (which I encouraged you to read) giving more detail.
“[7] The creationary postulate that complexity, variety and adaptability in living organisms and ecological systems are potentially inherent and complete in original populations as created and manifested over time through genetic variation and natural selection would be falsified by the demonstration that natural processes alone are unequivocally capable of producing these phenomena, were such a demonstration possible.  The evolutionary postulate that complexity, variety and adaptability in living organisms and ecological systems have increased over time, starting from zero, via DNA copying errors (i.e., mutations), natural selection, and millions of years, on the other hand, is becoming falsified by a growing body of empirical data indicating that natural processes alone are unequivocally incapable of producing these phenomena.�
Put simply, ToC postulates that all genetic information was complete in the original created species and through genetic loss (via epigenetics and natural selection) over time, the original kind speciated to adapt to particular environments. Whereas, ToE postulates that somehow genetic information formed naturally and randomly from chemicals and via chance copying errors (mutations) increased in complexity over millions of years. In ToC, genetic information complexity decreases over time and in ToE, genetic information complexity increases over time. Does that really sound the same?

My question to you was did your god control evolution?????? Yes or no will be fine.

As a ‘yes or no answer’, yes. To expound, God allowed for adaptation within each created kind (baramin) via Mendelian genetics and epigenetics (both being from existing genetic information) to allow for environmental changes and niches.

No, you do not answer my questions.

Lets take your 5 million years of the god making the original bear like animal. Then you are not a creationist that thinks the world was created only recently but at least 5 million years ago. Is the correct?

No, the ‘5 million years’ was from an article you linked, not me. I was just emphasising the fact that your articles conflict. BTW, you still haven’t supplied the citation reference from the paragraph you cut’n’pasted.

I cannot figure out you creation myth timeline and you have never given a timeline. When according to you was the earth created? If I read genesis it describes creating a flat earth with a dome of stars. So again can you give me timeline of your creation myth or at least some article that details a timeline and how known fossils fit in. The only date from you so far is five million when your god created the animals and therefore Adam (since he named the animals).

Again, ‘5 million years’ was your timeline, not mine. And, yes, I did give you a timeline and referenced it, again, in the last post. But so you can deny it one more time, from Post 335 - “. . . . the original bear kind was created on Day 6 of the Creation Week approximately 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. Approximately 1,500 years later, a pair (male and female) of the original bear kind entered the Ark and commenced reproducing 1 year later upon leaving the Ark. As the bear kind migrated to different environments, they adapted via epigenetics, giving rise to the various species we see today.�

When was the flood?

Approximately, between 4500 - 8500 years ago.

What animals were on the ark?

Specifically? I don’t know as no list, to my knowledge, was made. Maybe Noah was too busy doing other things. Though, there were representatives of all the created kind (baramin) from which all of the current species descended. A place to start may be Determining the Ark Kinds.

This is very important if you want to discuss creation versus you just trying to discredit science.

Another of your strawmen, I am not trying to discredit science, . . . just your interpretation of the actual evidence which science produces.

So your answer of "I know nothing about the flood that how evolution worked after the flood." does not help.

Again, another of your strawmen. I don’t believe I have ever said, "I know nothing about the flood that how evolution worked after the flood."

You need to discuss the migration and adaptation after the flood.

How long do you have? Here are a few articles that may help you to understand the processes.
Migration after the Flood
Speciation and the Animals on the Ark
Intrabaraminic Variation in Karyotypes and Chromosome Numbers

What kind of bears did all the bears adapt from after the flood?

And a few articles to read in relation to the bear adaptation -
Interpreting an Unusual Arctic Bear within a Creation Model of Origins
Polar bears ... one of a (created) kind

I need to know your beliefs since they differ from other creationist. You are ok with initial creation happening over 5 million years ago but others are not.

Again, the ‘5 million years’ was from a link you provided which I highlighted as being vasty different from the first (unreferenced) passage you provided referring to 23 million years. I understand that in view of the naturalistic evolutionary thinking of billions of years, a difference between 23 million and 5 million years is relatively small but considering that this same thinking suggests that the vast difference between chimpanzees and humans occurred in less than 6 million years, an 18 million year gap is quite large and difficult to explain. And just to make it quite clear, NO, I DON’T ACCEPT 5 MILLION YEARS (OR 23 MILLION YEARS) FROM CREATION. I BELIEVE GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS, THE EARTH AND THE ORIGINAL KINDS 6,000 TO 10,000 YEARS AGO. (BTW - the capitalisation was not shouting but ensuring it was quite clear.)

The LINK you had me read on bears does not show the break in evolution for a restart on a flood. So, does that mean you don't belive in the flood myth? Very confusing,. So do you belive in the flood myth? If so, why present an Link the does not show the flood interruption in bears?

If the representative bear pair (male & female) which entered the Ark were an example of the original created bear kind, what sort of ‘break’ or ‘interruption’ would you expect to see?

You confuse me and most likely others. Could you please provide some answers??????

As you can see, I have provided a number of links which relate to the queries you pose. I have posted these links in order to supply greater detail and better explain rather than my summaries of the articles. As I quoted in my previous post - “Some of the most vocal opponents of creationary thought, ostensibly repulsed by the work involved in objectively studying the technical details of an unfamiliar matter, persist in demanding something like a one- or two-sentence “theory of creation� [preferrably subservient to their naturalistic presuppositions].  Their insistence on such a simplistic approach to both evolution and creation has its reasons:  Evolution appears more credible when essential technical details remain beyond scrutiny, whereas creation finds its most compelling substantiation in technical, detailed analyses of actual empirical data and scientifically sound principles vis-a-vis both perspectives.� - (link)

I believe I have supplied a significant amount of information in the various links. Whether you choose to read them, is up to you. I suppose that will depend upon whether you are genuinely interested in debating the matter or just giving yourself a false ‘air of superiority’ by simply smashing your own strawmen arguments. And again, can you please supply the reference or link for your previously posted cut’n’paste paragraph which apparently implies a timeframe for Ursavus extending back 23 million years?

Have a good day!
Still small