A Question About the "Cat Kind"

[dust1n]

Are all members of felinae family all part of the cat kind?

Can someone explain to me how the cat kind works?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felid_hybrid

 

[Curious George]

Are all members of felinae family all part of the cat kind?

Can someone explain to me how the cat kind works?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felid_hybrid

I think this explains it. But if you need more help understanding something, just ask.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

From my observations, of watching documentaries on large cats and having house cats, I would say they very much are all related. Even with house cats, there are those who are more bulky, stalky, and more powerful that look more like lions, and some cats that are smaller, lankier, and more agile, such as a puma or leopard. They even move around, stalk, and hunt in similar manners. And they are all members of the Felidea family.

 

[Curious George]

??

 

[dust1n]

From my observations, of watching documentaries on large cats and having house cats, I would say they very much are all related. Even with house cats, there are those who are more bulky, stalky, and more powerful that look more like lions, and some cats that are smaller, lankier, and more agile, such as a puma or leopard. They even move around, stalk, and hunt in similar manners. And they are all members of the Felidea family.

Right, here is the problem.

Leopard, Lions, Tigers and Jaguars can all reproduce with one another, and make hybrids. A Puma can make a hybrid with a Leopard, but can't make one from a lion, tiger, or jaguar.

So, if being able to reproduce is the basis for being a specific kind, then we have a problem.

Either Pumas, Leopards, Lions, Tigers and Jaguars are all of the same kind, but Pumas can't reproduce with Lions, Tigers and Jaguars. Or Pumas are a separate kind from Leopards, Lions, Tiger, Jaguars, but Pumas can still reproduce with Leopards.

Either a member with the kind can't reproduce with 3 different members of the kind, OR a member of one kind of cat can reproduce with a member of a different kind of cat.

Conclusion, there is no such thing as a "cat kind" based on a premise that kinds of things that reproduce stay in their kind.

 

[Demonslayer]

Bats are birds, true story.

 

[Jainarayan]

Bats are birds, true story.

Bats are mice that joined the Air Force.

 

[Jainarayan]

Right, here is the problem.

Leopard, Lions, Tigers and Jaguars can all reproduce with one another, and make hybrids. A Puma can make a hybrid with a Leopard, but can't make one from a lion, tiger, or jaguar.

So, if being able to reproduce is the basis for being a specific kind, then we have a problem.

Either Pumas, Leopards, Lions, Tigers and Jaguars are all of the same kind, but Pumas can't reproduce with Lions, Tigers and Jaguars. Or Pumas are a separate kind from Leopards, Lions, Tiger, Jaguars, but Pumas can still reproduce with Leopards.

Either a member with the kind can't reproduce with 3 different members of the tribe, OR a member of one kind of cat can reproduce with a member of a different kind of cat.

Conclusion, there is no such thing as a "cat kind" based on a premise that kinds of things that reproduce stay in their kind.

You're missing the point of taxonomy.

The house cat is (genus) Felis (species) silvestris (subspecies catus). Puma is its own genus, just as Felis and Panthera are, but they are still all cats because of their basic biology and anatomy. Panthera, Felis and Puma are all genera within the family Felidae.

 

[dust1n]

You're missing the point of taxonomy.

The house cat is (genus) Felis (species) silvestris (subspecies catus). Puma is its own genus, just as Felis and Panthera are, but they are still all cats because of their basic biology and anatomy. Panthera, Felis and Puma are all genera within the family Felidae.

I notice you are not using the word "kind" here. Just to clear any confusion, this is a discussion about the "cat kind" and what makes the basis of this kind. What cats do and do not fall into it?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I notice you are not using the word "kind" here. Just to clear any confusion, this is a discussion about the "cat kind" and what makes the basis of this kind. What cats do and do not fall into it?

Define "Kind" and maybe we'll have something we can talk about.
How does being able to successfully interbreed with other species negate that they are cats? (If I'm understanding your position correctly)

 

[dust1n]

Define "Kind" and maybe we'll have something we can talk about.
How does being able to successfully interbreed with other species negate that they are cats? (If I'm understanding your position correctly)

Baraminology is a creationist system that classifies animals into groups called "created kinds" or "baramin" according to the account of creation in the book of Genesis and other parts of the Bible. It claims that kinds cannot interbreed, and have no evolutionary relationship to one another.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baraminology

 

[Jainarayan]

I notice you are not using the word "kind" here. Just to clear any confusion, this is a discussion about the "cat kind" and what makes the basis of this kind. What cats do and do not fall into it?

Because "kind" is not a taxonomic term, and discussions of animal classifications should at least pay lip service to science, not the bible.

 

[dust1n]

Because "kind" is not a taxonomic term, and discussions of animal classifications should at least pay lip service to science, not the bible.

Oh, well then we are not in any disagreement about how taxonomy should work. But I'm asking for validation of "creation science" so I'm hoping someone can offer me a creationist reasoning for this cat-astrophe.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Baraminology is a creationist system that classifies animals into groups called "created kinds" or "baramin" according to the account of creation in the book of Genesis and other parts of the Bible. It claims that kinds cannot interbreed, and have no evolutionary relationship to one another.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baraminology

Okay. Just based on the info in the wiki link you provided, I don't have anything to say about it, as I don't know about baraminology and according to the article, "
Distinction of created kinds
The question of determining the boundaries between baramin is a subject of much discussion and debate among creationists. A number of criteria have been presented..."

but there is controversy among the creationists, and no peer-reviewed articles have ever been published in otherwise reliable journals. In evolutionary biology, it is recognized that related species can sometimes have successful interbreedings, but being a "species" is no longer considered "can't successfully breed with other species" but "does not normally interbreed in natural/wild settings." AFAIK, all those hybridizations in the figure above only occur or primarily occur in captivity. I'll also note that human DNA shows traces of Neanderthal and Denisovian DNA, evidence that our ancient ancestors occasionally successfully interbred with our cousin species. DNA studies are greatly changing the way the relationships between biological groups are understood, rather than strictly on structural taxonomy.

It would seem that interspecies breeding would be impossible under creationism, but it is an expected and natural outcome of evolution.

 

[dust1n]

It would seem that interspecies breeding would be impossible under creationism, but it is an expected and natural outcome of evolution.

BOOM. I love it. Any creationist scientists want to disagree on the topic???

but there is controversy among the creationists, and no peer-reviewed articles have ever been published in otherwise reliable journals. In evolutionary biology, it is recognized that related species can sometimes have successful interbreedings, but being a "species" is no longer considered "can't successfully breed with other species" but "does not normally interbreed in natural/wild settings." AFAIK, all those hybridizations in the figure above only occur or primarily occur in captivity.

All wonderful points.

 

[dust1n]

C'mon, some one has to know how the "cat kind" works!

 

[Parsimony]

C'mon, some one has to know how the "cat kind" works!

By definition, the cat kind would constitute all species which can trace their descent back to the one original cat species created in the beginning. Interbreeding is a good diagnostic tool for determining that, but species A and species D can still be considered to be in the same kind even if they don't interbreed. If A can breed with B, B can breed with C, C can breed with D, but A can't breed with D, then you can still call A and D part of the same kind because the continuous hybrid line you can form indicates that they share a common ancestor. That's my understanding of the idea anyway.

 

[dust1n]

By definition, the cat kind would constitute all species which can trace their descent back to the one original cat species created in the beginning. Interbreeding is a good diagnostic tool for determining that, but species A and species D can still be considered to be in the same kind even if they don't interbreed. If A can breed with B, B can breed with C, C can breed with D, but A can't breed with D, then you can still call A and D part of the same kind because the continuous hybrid line you can form indicates that they share a common ancestor. That's my understanding of the idea anyway.

Then probably with this notion is that kinds can include diversity enough to the point that species can no longer reproduce, then this could apply equally to all life. As in, if one traces their descent back to "one original cat species" then how can one know determine if this is the original cat species, or just an offshoot of yet another original cat species? How do we know that there is a single species which all Felidae originate from, instead of there being a single species in which all Feliforms are from?

House cats may not be able to reproduce with:

So, how do I know they didn't arrive from an original species then?


By the way, thanks. I was hoping someone one find that thing you pointed out.

 

[dust1n]

Actually, here's a better example:

This is the only civet alive in the entire Nandiniidae family. It's basically a cat body with a weasels head. It can't mate with any cat species of any species in the weasel/ferret/raccoon family. But it could very well be part of a lineage of some sort original species of the "cat/weasel/civet" kind. And then by extension all Feliforms. And Feliforms and Caniforms, etc., back to the UCA.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Do fat cats belong to the cat kind
or can they only mate with bankers and republicans.