(May 13, 2012 at 8:31 pm)Alter2Ego Wrote:(April 16, 2012 at 11:41 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: They are talking about the descendants of one species evolving into a different species, like eohippus into the modern horse. 'Family' has a specific meaning in taxonomy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_(biology)ALTER2EGO -to- MISTER AGENDA:
I wouldn't be too sure of that if I were you. The word "species" was fabricated by evolutionists and they use it interchangeably for animals that can interbreed as well as for animals that cannot interbreed. As a reminder, below is the definition of "species" from my OP.
Quote:DEFINITION OF SPECIES:
Loosely speaking, a species is a related group of organisms that share a more or less distinctive form and are capable of interbreeding. As defined by Ernst Mayr, species are:
"groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations which are reproductively isolated from other such groups."
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Species
Truth be told, pro-evolution scientists change the meaning of the word "species" whenever it suits their purposes, as confirmed by biologist John Endler who wrote:
"Species are "tools that are fashioned for characterizing organic diversity" (Lewin,1979). Just as there are a variety of chisels made for different purposes, different species concepts are best for different purposes; and just as it is inadvisable to use a carving chisel to cut a mortise, problems arise when one species concept is used when it is inappropriate. Confusion and controversy have often resulted because different people working with different groups of organisms mean different things by "species.""
Another thing: The Taxonomy Table was dreamed up by Carl Linnaeus (May 23, 1707 – January 10, 1778) who erroneously classified animals based upon their similarities. In some instances, he put animals in different species despite the fact they can actually interbreed.
No, the reason the definition of species is used differently is because the definition of a species is so imprecise.
For example, is every bacteria a different species? No two bacteria can interbreed, so does that make every bacteria in existence a separate species? No? How exactly do you define a species for organisms who reproduce asexually?
Your definition from OP is already imprecise. Are horses and donkeys the same species? They can interbreed but their offspring are infertile.
What about ring species? Some organisms exist over a wide geographical area (like a ring around a valley for example.) If you were to take two of the organisms fairly close to each other, they could produce fertile offspring, but as the mileage increases they can no longer reproduce, and when the mileage is great enough they act as totally different species!
All of that just goes to show that the definition of a species is so imprecise. When differing definitions of species are used, it is not to try and fool people, it's a tool of convenience to make a point. The word species is simply a tool used for classification.
