|
gluadys -> RE: Mass Extinction and the nature of God. (5/4/2008 11:50:13 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
ORIGINAL:glaudysquote:
Maybe no kinds (whatever they are) have ever become extinct, but plenty of species have.
If you understood the Bible you would understand what kinds are.
Until Linneaus developed his taxonomic system the terms "kind" "species" and "genus" were used interchangeably. It was understood that almost anything (as per Aristotle) could be a species in one respect and a genus in another respect. For example, in respect to baked goods, a pie is a "kind" or "species" of baked good, others being such things as cakes, buns and cookies. But "pie" itself can be further sub0divided into categories such as double-crust, single-crust, fruit, custard and small (tarts). In respect to these "pie" is the genus and each is a "kind" or "species" of pie.
So a "species" is always a member of a "genus" ( a term which also means "kind"), but the ranking was not fixed until Linneaus used the terms for the two bottom ranks of his taxonomy. Even then, to Linneaus and all biologists after him into the 19th century "species" meant "kind", the first term being the Latin equivalent of both the English "kind" and the Hebrew "min".
It was probably not evolution that broke up the equivalence of "kind" and "species" but rather the continuing discovery of new species in all parts of the world. As the catalogue of known species went from less than 5,000 to more than 30,000 and kept climbing, the question of whether they could all have fit into the ark became problematic.
At this point, evolution offered a way out for the literal interpreter of scripture. Since it became increasingly clear that species did change, why not incorporate a bit of evolution (micro-evolution) into creationism? And so we come to the modern standard creationist hypothesis that God did not in fact create every "species" (as defined by taxonomists), but a limited number of "kinds" that did fit easily into the ark and after the flood diversified through an amazingly rapid evolutionary process into all the taxonomic "species" we see today.
Thus a new meaning of "kind" was born. Ah, but that isn't quite right either, because no one, including those who invented this new interpretation of Genesis, has the foggiest idea how to define a kind.
If you actually know what a "kind" is, you might like to enlighten the rest of us.
quote:
Do you not understand the difference between “mass extinction” and the extinction of individual species?
Extinction is the disappearance of a species i.e. not one organism of the species remains alive. Mass extinction is the disappearance of a great number of species in a relatively short framework of time--usually connected with a major climate change or some other event with global impact.
Mass extinction is not simply the death of many organisms as in the flood. It requires the disappearance of whole species. When the last imperial woodpecker was shot by a Mexican truck driver that was the extinction of that species. The loss of over 70% of all species of the Permian age as it came to a close was mass extinction.
quote:
What does that have to do with the price of rice in China?
Does the price of rice in China have anything to do with extinction?
quote:
Your attempts at connecting today’s creationists with historical Catholicism are as valid as a three-dollar bill.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I am not all that familiar with Catholic creationists.
quote:
Was Noah’s ark intended to prevent extinctions since the flood?
Scripture makes no mention of any extinctions prior to, during or after the flood. "Extinction of species" is an unknown concept as far as scripture is concerned.
quote:
Good point. ANY interpretation that includes mass extinction is anti-Bible.
As long as one chains oneself to a literal interpretation anyway.
|
|
|
|