quote:
Now after the fall of man and sin entered the world things were allowed to deteriorate. And we know there are a variety of things which cause mutations in genes.
Where is the scientific evidence that points to mutations starting only 6,000 years ago?
quote:
It says in Genesis that things will "reproduce after their kind". My personal belief is that all dogs came from a common dog ansestor, all cats from a common cat and so on. This would certainly make the ark story more plausable.
So are we humans part of the human kind, the ape kind, the primate kind, the vertebrate kind, the metazoan kind, or the animal kind? What kind of experiments do you do to place humans in one kind or another? There are enough morphological similarities to place us in the primate kind if we are comparing primates to the diversity of cats in the cat kind. More than enough similarity to place us in the vertebrate kind. Where do we stop, and by what objective scientific evidence do we base our judgements? If we base kinds by which species can interbreed, then a new species that is not able to interbreed with the parent stock is the formation of a new kind, or macroevolution. If this is the criteria, then macroevolution has been observed.
Also, cats are cats only because we call them cats. If there was a new breed of feline that we decided to name a felinocine, would that be macroevolution simply because we call it by another name? The "kind" argument usually collapses into a naming game (eg, its a different cat, but it's still a cat). I could just as easily say a transitional fossil from reptiles to mammals is not macroevolution since they are still vertebrates. There needs to be a better test of what a kind is besides what we decide to call the new species.
quote:
I think their is room for something to have been here before creation as it is written in Genesis.
My own personal feeling is that the Genesis account on the creation of humans is trying to relate to the start of civilization. The Garden of Eden was an allegory for humanity's innocence before they were "corrupted" by city life. Instead of living off the land and working with the land, humans moved to societies where stealing was rewarded more so than in a pastoral or rural setting. Just my opinion though.
™ Version 4.2
