The better half of the joke

[Eloi]

... is that evolutionists not only say that some animal species come from previous ones, but they also say that each plant species comes from another previous one (or that they used to say BEFORE)... This, after, according to them, plants stopped living in the water to start living on land... kind of like when fish ceasing to be aquatic to become semi-terrestrial amphibians ... or humans stopped living in caves to start building houses

Did you know this part of the story? It is never ending.

Do you think that the millions of years that the planet has existed are enough for so many SUPERDUPERULTRASLOW transformations that these scientists talk about?

[LittleNipper]

I personally do not hold that most of what scientists regard as different species actually are. Any animal that can mate with another are of the same kind or species.

While this was the prevailing species definition until 50 years ago, and you're welcome to hold on to it as long as you wish, it did have its shortcomings and has been all but abandoned. Since then, and in an attempt to deal with these weaknesses and other issues, new species concepts have been put forward:

...............................Species Concepts
.....................Alternative Species Definitions

Biological Species Concept ( e g , Mayr, 1942,1963)
Isolation [Species] Concept (e.g., Paterson, 1985)
Recognition [Species] Concept (e.g., Paterson, 1985)
Evolutionary Species Concept (e.g., Wiley, 1978, 1981)
Ecological Species Concept (Van Valen, 1976)
Cohesion Species Concept (Templeton, 1989)
Phylogenetic Species Concept (e.g., Cracraft, 1983)
Phylogenetic species concept I (Panchen, 1992)
Phylogenetic species concept I I (Donoghue, 1985; Mishler, 1985)
Phylogenetic species concept I l l (Cracraft, 1983)
Genealogical Species Concept (Baum and Shaw,1995)
Phenetic Species Concept (Sokal and Crovello, 1970)
Genotypic Cluster [Species] Definition (Mallet, 1995)
source

.

And why should I "change to accept some new definition ". I don't need any excuses.

And there was no "should" urging you to. Like I said, "you're welcome to hold on to it (the outdated concept of species) as long as you wish." I see no need to step out of character for me or the findings of science.---ever


.

It's not outdated. The reality is that NOAH simply didn't need a species of every color and size and you don't seem to get that --- or you don't want to get it...

[Clownboat]

It's not outdated. The reality is that NOAH simply didn't need a species of every color and size and you don't seem to get that --- or you don't want to get it...

350,000 species of beetles on the planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?
Over 11,000 species of birds on this planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?

By the way, you never did provide the information about how salt and fresh water doesn't mix or whatever you were alluding to earlier. I assume you looked in to it and found out you were mistaken to offer such a thing up to explain how salt and fresh water dependent animals survived the flood. Any other ideas about how such animals survived or should we just not think about such things in your opinion as it then makes the story harder to believe?

[LittleNipper]

It's not outdated. The reality is that NOAH simply didn't need a species of every color and size and you don't seem to get that --- or you don't want to get it...

350,000 species of beetles on the planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?
Over 11,000 species of birds on this planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?

By the way, you never did provide the information about how salt and fresh water doesn't mix or whatever you were alluding to earlier. I assume you looked in to it and found out you were mistaken to offer such a thing up to explain how salt and fresh water dependent animals survived the flood. Any other ideas about how such animals survived or should we just not think about such things in your opinion as it then makes the story harder to believe?

Consider this:

[brunumb]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #93]

Notice how carefully the two containers were handled. Fresh water is less dense than salt water and will tend to float as a layer on the top. But, just a little bit of agitation or stirring will cause them to mix and form a uniform solution. Listening to all the creationist descriptions of the cataclysmic biblical flood, it is patently obvious which scenario applies. Epic fail, sorry.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #93]

Notice how carefully the two containers were handled. Fresh water is less dense than salt water and will tend to float as a layer on the top. But, just a little bit of agitation or stirring will cause them to mix and form a uniform solution. Listening to all the creationist descriptions of the cataclysmic biblical flood, it is patently obvious which scenario applies. Epic fail, sorry.

Also failed to answer:
350,000 species of beetles on the planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?
Over 11,000 species of birds on this planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?

All of us reading know why... because it is nonsensical to claim that evolution doesn't happen while requiring super evolution to explain what we now see on this planet.

[Tcg]

Over 11,000 species of birds on this planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?

According to Genesis 7:3, Noah was told by "the LORD" to take 7 pairs of each kind of bird. That would be a total of 154,000 birds assuming the 11,000 estimate. Later in the same chapter, we read that Noah was 600 years old when the flood started. Clear signs that the author was telling a mythological tale.


Tcg

[LittleNipper]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #93]

Notice how carefully the two containers were handled. Fresh water is less dense than salt water and will tend to float as a layer on the top. But, just a little bit of agitation or stirring will cause them to mix and form a uniform solution. Listening to all the creationist descriptions of the cataclysmic biblical flood, it is patently obvious which scenario applies. Epic fail, sorry.

Also failed to answer:
350,000 species of beetles on the planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?
Over 11,000 species of birds on this planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?

All of us reading know why... because it is nonsensical to claim that evolution doesn't happen while requiring super evolution to explain what we now see on this planet.

Creationists do NOT regard a view of evolution that promotes that all species originated from one living thing billions of years in the past. Creationists only accept that every living ting is unique but that they remain true to their kind and are incapable to becoming a new and different kind. Horses remain horses, cats remain cats, dogs remain dogs, and beetles remain beetles.There may in actually be only a few hundred different kinds of beetles. The rest are all variation of the same.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #97]
But at last once in my life I want to meet a creationist who says that he believes in macroevolution but not in microevolution!

[Clownboat]

Creationists do NOT regard a view of evolution that promotes that all species originated from one living thing billions of years in the past. Creationists only accept that every living ting is unique but that they remain true to their kind and are incapable to becoming a new and different kind. Horses remain horses, cats remain cats, dogs remain dogs, and beetles remain beetles.

350,000 species of beetles on the planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?
Over 11,000 species of birds on this planet. How many species do you think Noah had on the ark?

There may in actually be only a few hundred different kinds of beetles. The rest are all variation of the same.

There are in fact 350,000 species of beetles and 'kind' is a made up word by the religious to avoid facing this reality.

If Noah had only a pair of beetle on the ark, that doesn't seem all that hard to accommodate for, but that would require super evolution to get from 1 species of beetle to the 350,000 we now have on this planet. How can a evolution denier also argue for such an accelerated form of evolution? Calling a species a 'kind' doesn't cut it.

[brunumb]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #97]

Many insects reproduce by laying their eggs in the bodies of other insects. How did these species multiply after they left the ark?