Thursday, 1 September 2016

Naturalis Historia: The Increasing Inclusiveness of Biblical Kinds

Naturalis Historia: The Increasing Inclusiveness of Biblical Kinds

"In a talk at the Creation Museum last month, Ken Ham reiterated this same claim saying “and we believe that all bats are probably the same kind.” That the Ark Encounter team can speculate that “it is quite possible that every bat is a member of the same kind” is a mind-blowing statement. How could the incredible array of diverse characters that are found among the bats be contained in just a few ancestors just 4000 years ago? Bats are so diverse that scientists classify them as an order with suborders and then families within those suborder. Genetically and morphologically bats are at least as diverse as the orders of rodents, carnivores and ungulates. Each of these orders of mammals contain many families which the Ark Encounter believes are separate kinds.

To suggest all bats are derived from a common ancestor would require phenomenal amounts of new diversity which could only be generated naturally by mutations. So far this is something that no creationist is willing to consider because that sounds like the creation of new information and mutations are considered degenerative by YECs. If they admit that mutations can create new features they might as well pack up their anti-evolutionary pamphlets and join the evolution crowd.

But seriously, if Ken Ham is willing to speculate that all 1240 living bat species and countless extinct species would have been derived from just a single set of common ancestors on the ark what is to stop him there? Why not propose that the ancestor of bats might not have been able to fly? Couldn’t God have anticipated the new niches that would open up after the Flood and programmed the genetic diversity required for making arms able to take flight into a non-flying common ancestor which was stored on the ark? Why not? This might sound absurd but the very idea that 1240 species of bats could evolve from a common ancestor in just a few hundred years is completely absurd already. You might respond, doesn’t the Bible mentions bats? Yes, but it also mention foxes and dogs which also didn’t exist as species until after the flood according to YEC hyper-evolution. So the bats mentioned in the Bible could simply have been the post-fall adapted winged mammals."

I remember as a kid suggesting to my mother that perhaps there were less species in Noah's day than there are now and that species have multiplied through breeding. She replied "That's basically evolution!" Which is basically what Creationists now believe.

No comments:

Post a Comment