ICR acts/facts and the bear facts and some facts could bear more .

ICR(Acts/factsAug) had a interesting article on the famous bear dogs found in fossils above the k-t line. by Brian Thomas.

I say creationist should strive to put creatures into as few JKINDS as possible for to make a smaller world from creatioon week and on the ark.

i disagree with this article in trying to say YEC should see bears and dogs as different kinds.

I insist dogs are just small bears. so the beardog fossils talked about are just showing a post flood spectrum of diversity in some KIND. this kind including bears, dogs, probably seals, etc ety.

Yes dog types would be found alongside beardog and bear types, its just showing diversity of a kind after the flood.

Views: 52

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You believe that dogs are just small bears?  On what basis?  You can define "kinds" any which way that you wish.  By doing so, you are creating the answers you want to hear to any questions you wish to propose.  If you read "Noah’s Ark, A Feasibility Study" by John Woodmorappe, you will see that there was plenty of room in the Ark for ALL "kinds".

Furthermore, if you really delve into DNA, you will find that the DNA of dogs and bears, although similar, are not connected.



Mel Kirk said:

You believe that dogs are just small bears?  On what basis?  You can define "kinds" any which way that you wish.  By doing so, you are creating the answers you want to hear to any questions you wish to propose.  If you read "Noah’s Ark, A Feasibility Study" by John Woodmorappe, you will see that there was plenty of room in the Ark for ALL "kinds".

Furthermore, if you really delve into DNA, you will find that the DNA of dogs and bears, although similar, are not connected.

Its not defining KINDS anyway i wish. its based on clear anatomical features with a biblical presumption that KINDS must be very inclusive to explain how much diversity is about now and in the past.

The ark would not fit evey kind if kind includes everything .

dNA should not be the trail for creationism. dNA follows bodyplan changes.

YEC needs bodyplan changes to come from mechanisms that would overawe DNA structures. Evolutionists would use DNA to say people are apes.

I insist. dogs are clearly small bears. thats why in the spectrum of fossils you find the BEARDOGS, not extinct, as it shows they are within the same KIND. why not?

YEC would predict a grand diversity of a kind that would include bears and dogs and seals, i think, in all types.

Creationism would not predict wolves/dogs and bears and a hundred type of like creatures.

The fossil record is just wHAT this YEC dude wants. Bearsdogs are just creatures of which bears and dogs/wolves are trivial soecies.

Before one reaches a conclusion, one must examine all of the facts.  Obviously you do not wish to read the feasibility study before making the conclusion that, "The ark would not fit every kind if kind includes everything"

As an engineer, I frequently do feasibility studies, and forensic reports.  in each case I have to have all of the available  facts and evaluate them.  That is the approach that is defensible.  All other suppositions are merely hearsay and completely indefensible.  Evolutionists are in the later group.  They ignore any information which may be contrary to their stance.



Mel Kirk said:

Before one reaches a conclusion, one must examine all of the facts.  Obviously you do not wish to read the feasibility study before making the conclusion that, "The ark would not fit every kind if kind includes everything"

As an engineer, I frequently do feasibility studies, and forensic reports.  in each case I have to have all of the available  facts and evaluate them.  That is the approach that is defensible.  All other suppositions are merely hearsay and completely indefensible.  Evolutionists are in the later group.  They ignore any information which may be contrary to their stance

Everybody knows abiut facts. i know them from long acquaintence.

The Ark could not fit all the types of critters if the concept of dividing bears and wolves was the rule. Its impossible and unwelcome.

Creationism must reduce types into kinds.

Anyways bears and wolves etc are the same kind if anatomy matters.

in fact the kind on the ark would not be recognized from whence these creatures come from.

The fossil record has hordes of types of these creatures. Beardogs are just another excellent example of the spectrum from which our simple bears and wolves come from. 

Yes your local dogs are tiny fat moving bears. And grizzely bears are just big collies.

this should be the desire of YEC. not wolves and bears and t rex on the ark!

When faced with facts, ie. the feasibility study I recommended you read, you dismiss any attempt to enter a rational conversation.  When you become more educated on biology, fossils, anatomy, etc. I will be happy to continue this conversation.

I recommend my website foundationengineers.com and the link entitled evolution Fact or fiction, you decide.  If you are of an open mind, please read these 365 articles, then we can enter into an intelligent conversation.

Have a good day.

Robert Byers said:



Mel Kirk said:

Before one reaches a conclusion, one must examine all of the facts.  Obviously you do not wish to read the feasibility study before making the conclusion that, "The ark would not fit every kind if kind includes everything"

As an engineer, I frequently do feasibility studies, and forensic reports.  in each case I have to have all of the available  facts and evaluate them.  That is the approach that is defensible.  All other suppositions are merely hearsay and completely indefensible.  Evolutionists are in the later group.  They ignore any information which may be contrary to their stance

Everybody knows abiut facts. i know them from long acquaintence.

The Ark could not fit all the types of critters if the concept of dividing bears and wolves was the rule. Its impossible and unwelcome.

Creationism must reduce types into kinds.

Anyways bears and wolves etc are the same kind if anatomy matters.

in fact the kind on the ark would not be recognized from whence these creatures come from.

The fossil record has hordes of types of these creatures. Beardogs are just another excellent example of the spectrum from which our simple bears and wolves come from. 

Yes your local dogs are tiny fat moving bears. And grizzely bears are just big collies.

this should be the desire of YEC. not wolves and bears and t rex on the ark!

Mel Kirk. i will chech out the websit and sure I'll like all or most of it.

our discussion was intelligent from both sides. Diaagreement does not mean one side is dumb.

we creationists must hold evolutionists to this and they to us.

I'm educated plenty on anatomy, biology, etc.

your feasibility study is beside the point. Anyways i'm confident you don't know the fossil record and many thoughtful creationists don't. the ark would not fit millions of kinds.

it doesn't matter. tHere were only small numbers of kinds. Adam really could name the kinds on creationweek. 

Hey don't get frustrated and angry. We are both correcting each other and I'm at peace with your attempts. am i the better man/Christian???

Just think carefully about what a kind is and why YEC needs to squeeze as many types into that kind as possible!

So beardogs really are just a creature with traits like bears or dogs. then others have only bear traits or dog/wolf ones.

its a worthy conversation before we both agree with each other. 

Reply to Discussion

RSS

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms
FAQ

Homeschool Curriculum

Members

Creation Conversations 2018

What's new @ CC for 2018? 

Creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2018   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service