(March 19, 2015 at 9:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote:(March 19, 2015 at 7:25 am)Mr Greene Wrote: BS.Because it uses the word "kind" which is a synonym of "species", how many times must I link the definition?
Kind=/=Species
How many "Kinds" of ants are there?
The bible doesn't mention the word species once, it is therefore incapable of defining the word.
Not that I expect any form of honesty from a creationist..
As stated previously Kind does not equal species.
(March 19, 2015 at 9:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote:(March 19, 2015 at 7:25 am)Mr Greene Wrote: As the definition of evolution and speciation relate to the scientific definition of species any "bible definition" is irrelevant.Not when we are discussing things in relation to the bible.
we were discussing things in relation to evolution; the bible is irrelevant (it's hard to think of a situation where it could be relevant)
(March 19, 2015 at 9:04 am)Huggy74 Wrote:(March 19, 2015 at 7:25 am)Mr Greene Wrote: Please, amuse me and continue your attempt at retroactive arse-covering.If you think that I'm back tracking, provide the quote and I'll prove where I've said the exact same thing in a previous thread.
See reversion to "Kind" and the lack of definition entailed, precisely because the word is not a synonym of species, and therefore allows creationists the freedom to claim that speciation events have not affected their precious snowflake beliefs.
Quote:I don't understand why you'd come to a discussion forum, and then proceed to reap from visibility any voice that disagrees with you. If you're going to do that, why not just sit in front of a mirror and pat yourself on the back continuously?-Esquilax
Evolution - Adapt or be eaten.
