Today, we have many hybrids between different species of dogs, cattles, wheat, and such. Those are hybrids in the same gender, which is a believable evidence that organisms evolved into other species inside the same gender. But do we have any hybrids between organisms not in the same gender, but in the same class? In other words, between different gender? Such as a cat to a tiger. That kind of hybrid would not be able to survive.
Then from whom did the first species in the gender evolve from, and how? We need the first species in the same gender to have evolved from another gender, right? So that say the first species of dog evolved into different breeds of dogs, but where did the first dog come from? he could not have evolved directly from a unicellular could he? And a hybrid from another gender (in other words, half-way evolved species) would not survive.
I dont really know if I worded it right, so I might not make sense, but oh well, you guys comment and if I see some people misunderstand me, I'll do the best I can to try to reword it.
Hybrids
Started by
evolution_false
, Jul 02 2005 11:33 AM
-
This topic is locked
4 replies to this topic
#1
evolution_false
-
- Member
-
- 17 posts
Junior Member
-
Age: 13
-
Christian
-
Creationist
-
Location: At the keyboard
Posted 02 July 2005 - 11:33 AM
#2
evolution_false
-
- Member
-
- 17 posts
Junior Member
-
Age: 13
-
Christian
-
Creationist
-
Location: At the keyboard
Posted 02 July 2005 - 02:34 PM
I donno what i was thinking. LOL all the gender on my topic i meant genus. thought it sounded weird.
#3
chance
-
- Banned
-
- 2,029 posts
Veteran Member
-
Age: 51
-
no affiliation
-
Atheist
-
Australia
Posted 03 July 2005 - 02:09 PM
Ok, consider for a moment that evolution is true, Question - if you travelled back in time could you point to a date where a dog is not a dog?
#4
lionheart209
-
- Veteran Member
-
- 107 posts
Member
-
Age: 32
-
Christian
-
Young Earth Creationist
-
Lodi, Ca
Posted 10 September 2005 - 10:44 AM
I donno what i was thinking. LOL all the gender on my topic i meant genus. thought it sounded weird.
We read in Genesis that God created animals according to their KIND, as you stated, we see variations of KINDS such as for the cat KIND, Lions/tigers/panther/
Examples for the dog KIND, wolf/fox/coyote etc....
You may see cross bred types of animals such as a horse bred with a zebra or a german shephard bred with a wolf, that can work because they are of the same KIND.
You'll never see a wolf breed with a Lion, or a zebra with a fox, it goes against God's design.
He created animals according to their KIND.
Some evolutionists ask you to define a KIND, heres a classic answer.
A wolf, a fox and a coyote and a chicken all stand side by side, see if you can point out the one that is not of that KIND.
If you use the bibles teachings and cross examine them with todays scientific facts/operational science, you'll see that science supports the bible.
#5
chance
-
- Banned
-
- 2,029 posts
Veteran Member
-
Age: 51
-
no affiliation
-
Atheist
-
Australia
Posted 11 September 2005 - 02:12 PM
We read in Genesis that God created animals according to their KIND, as you stated, we see variations of KINDS such as for the cat KIND, Lions/tigers/panther/
Examples for the dog KIND, wolf/fox/coyote etc....
You may see cross bred types of animals such as a horse bred with a zebra or a german shephard bred with a wolf, that can work because they are of the same KIND.
You'll never see a wolf breed with a Lion, or a zebra with a fox, it goes against God's design.
He created animals according to their KIND.
Some evolutionists ask you to define a KIND, heres a classic answer.
A wolf, a fox and a coyote and a chicken all stand side by side, see if you can point out the one that is not of that KIND.
If you use the bibles teachings and cross examine them with todays scientific facts/operational science, you'll see that science supports the bible.
I assumed that kind, in the biblical sense was equivalent to species, yes?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
