I have a question. How can secularists make comments like the one above (seen it made countless times) because things can be understood truly if not exhaustively or perfectly but when a creationist can't always perfectly delineate between original kinds or know the exact day of creation or exactly what the preflood world was like, their whole worldview is expected to collapse?
Yay, you get it. That is exactly the point!
When it comes to evolution, neither of us can delineate between species clearly...That's the whole point.
It's like picking the hour that you changed from a child, to an adult, we can create human constructs, Bah Miztvah for example, but in a natural sense, the change is so gradual that it would be impossible to point out which exact instant a child becomes an adult. We all know it has to happen, but the change is so gradual that there really isn't a clear dividing line.
It is the same thing when delineating species.
That's why we can't be clear on species, and that's why you can't be clear on brahmins.
Because we really don't observe a clear cut original kind. (correct me if I'm wrong)
The BIG difference here...
YECs claim that there was one specific brahmin or kind that started from nothing that gave rise to all the others, thus, it should be able to be pointed out, correct?
I repeat, one specific animal.
Evolution claims that there is one big family tree of related species which display such subtle differences at times, that there is no unambiguous way to classify them.