Re: complex specified information

TomS <TomS_member@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:13:03 -0400, in article
<proto-4FDF3A.17130309032009@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Walter Bushell stated..."

In article <246616914.00012b7a.020.0001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
TomS <TomS_member@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:03:32 -0400, in article
<proto-646333.12033109032009@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Walter Bushell stated..."

In article <Op0sl.12127$9a.365@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"[M]adman" <grat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

John Harshman wrote:
[M]adman wrote:
Your DNA proves you were created. DNA is not random but an organized
blueprint.

And even though humans are closest to chimpanzees in DNA sequencing,
there are still some 40 million differences

How many of those differences are not random? How would you tell? Does
"40 million" sound so much more impressive to you than "1.3%"?

Not really.

The differences, while slight in numbers, are huge enough to completly
seperate us from them.

And you know what that means right? That means we cannot even mate with
them. Which means we are not of the same kind.

Like the bible says.

Zing, if not mating makes a different kind, the Arc was not big enough
to carry the beetles, for which, as you know, God has an inordinate
fondness.


The Bible does not say that not mating means different kinds.

Madman stated above that they do, he's free to define "kind" however he
wants, if he sticks with a definition.

The Bible does not say that chimpanzees are of a different kind
from humans.

I'm pretty sure the Bible makes no mention of chimps or bonobos, or any
definition of "kind" for that matter.

The word "ape" in the language of the KJV referred to what we would
call "monkeys" today. Chimps, bonobos, orangs, gibbons, siamangs, and
gorillas were not known in the English-speaking world of the early
17th century.

Likewise the Latin of the time used Simia indifferently for them all.
However, the medieval bestiary <http://bestiary.ca/beasts/beast148.htm>
knew that apes had no tail. It's very likely they knew *less* in the
17th century than in the 14th. For example, the "cericopithicus" is
likely some monkey; the cynocephalus, is probably a baboon.

The word "kind" (as a translation for the Hebrew "min") is only used
in a very particular context, "according to his/her/its/their kind".
That tells me that it is some kind of an idiom, and it very well may
be a mistake to think that "kind" refers to anything at all - much
less that it refers to a collective for living things - much much less
that it has some sort of biological significance (like genetic
relationship).

If you take "min" to be like the vernacular Latin "species" or the Greek
"eidos", then it probably means "appearance" or "form" in context - in
other words, progeny resemble their parents. Given that there's evidence
in the OT of belief in spontaneous generation, and such ideas also
existed in Persia as well, the claim is that these are animals that
resemble parents rather than being like bees born from a lion's body
(Judges 14:8f).

There is no taxonomy here. It is apparent that ordinarily organisms
resemble their parents.


The Bible does not say that humans do not mate with chimpanzees.

So, what is it that is: like the Bible says?



--
John S. Wilkins, Philosophy, University of Sydney
scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
But al be that he was a philosophre,
Yet hadde he but litel gold in cofre

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: moral relativism
    ... system or moral judgements? ... Parents who say - Don't do that it is ... mind' and empathy,  from social rewards and punishments,  from the ... humans in different places and times because, as a species, we've ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)
  • I wonder how they would score on an IQ test?
    ... YOUNG CHIMPS TOP ADULT HUMANS IN NUMERICAL MEMORY ... Young chimpanzees have an ~Sextraordinary~T ability to remember numerals ...
    (sci.research.careers)
  • Re: complex specified information
    ... And even though humans are closest to chimpanzees in DNA sequencing, ... I'm pretty sure the Bible makes no mention of chimps or bonobos, ... less that it refers to a collective for living things - much much less ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Geneticists: no evidence of human chromosomes in the chimps
    ... classified as an ape or with the apes. ... Bonobos and chimpanzees are more like humans ... Gorillas are more like bonobos, chimpanzees, Neandertals, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Wilkins and DarkSyde
    ... suppose that God decided to create humans with free will because God ... to become an adult - and the equal of its parents in all important ... And this deity would have the power to ...
    (talk.origins)