Come on, Biblestudent - give us a proper argument. This is what I said earlier. 'Kinds' is such an elastic term used by creationists that it can be applied to anything and everything. Saying that 'god deemed it to be so' and leaving it at that is not explaining anything.
What does a 'kind'...
Well, if they've got diagrams of that quality, then it must be true. What would clinch it for me is to see some really hard-looking equations and numbers and stuff. Oh yeah, and loads of graphs too. Gotta have graphs.
This can also be levelled at your alternative, though. What is the firm basis for creationism, other than an ancient set of scrolls? This thread is about creationists providing a testable hypothesis and credible evidence. Until you do - and that evidence far outweighs the evidence for evolution...
www.physorg.com/news9211.html
Of course, as with anything in science, it's not 100% proof, but the evidence for taxonomic relationships between us and other species is compelling.
As JarOfThoughts said, we are still apes. And science is not trying to 'prove' anything. It provides the best current explanations based on the available evidence. And the best explanation we currently have is that we are a species of ape.
ChristianDoc
For what it's worth, all 3 of my local GPs are christians, and are firm proponents of Intelligent Design and creationism. I fundamentally disagree with them on points of evolution, but their ability to do their job doesn't seem to be compromised. They have patched me up a number of...
Hopefully not on these threads. It has beeen iterated a number of times that abiogenesis is separate from ToE. ToE seeks to explain how life evolved after it got started (by whatever means), not how it got started.
Whilst I'm in broad agreement with your OP, I take exception to the above. The 'offending nations' are those that can't live within their means. Blaming it all on the 'Third World' is, IMO, wrong. It is we in the over-consumptive rich nations that are responsible for planetary despoilation...
Anyone else worried about the kudos Wiki is getting on these threads? If we are debating, why not go to the source? It's too easy just to copy and paste vast tracts from Wiki.
I think you may be on to a losing battle here, DeitySlayer.
Many creationists today try to fit the biblical notion of kinds into modern science and conveniently blur the boundaries. 'Kind' can be whatever they determine it to be. Taxonomy and the bible don't really concur. 'Whale' comes under...