Like I said, I started with evolution and then discovered creation science. I compared the two and ended up thinking creation science was more right. I do not know all the arguments involved between the two, but now I have resources which I can refer to quickly and then we can compare (Note: I still do not have something to use for Baraminolgy this way). I still start with evolution and end with creation science and then compare. I'm not pulling arguments out of thin air.
Let's talk about common descent which is a big topic. I do not find any problems here from evo. However, CS takes issue with common descent. I think Peterson below is discussing families, so across families which restricts it even more. I was thinking it was across classes.
"Descent with modification
We've defined evolution as descent with modification from a common ancestor, but exactly what has been modified? Evolution only occurs when there is a change in
gene frequency within a
population over time. These genetic differences are heritable and can be passed on to the next generation — which is what really matters in evolution: long term change."
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_15
The following uses "kind," but I think he means family in this case. Have to agree that is a bit confusing as his keynote statement below
Roger Peterson, (former high school biology and chemistry teacher) curriculum developer for AIG
“Creationists agree with the idea of “descent with modification” but not with the notion of a single common ancestor.”
"It is often claimed that biblical creationists believe that species have always been the same since Creation. This is a straw-man argument, as it does not accurately present our position.
Some evolutionists prop up this false understanding of the fixity of species and then show examples of speciation to suggest that the claims of creationists do not fit with what we observe in the natural world. Many are convinced by this argument, but these evolutionists have only managed to defeat an argument we haven’t made. To understand where this false notion comes from, I would recommend you read “
Fixity of Species” by Bodie Hodge.
The idea that species change is observable in nature and in the laboratory.The idea that species change is observable in nature and in the laboratory. We also read in Genesis 1 that the various plants and animals are created and reproduce “after their kind.” We understand this to mean that there are certain kinds that God created, not that these various kinds evolved over time from a common, hypothetical ancestor.
A passage in Deuteronomy 14 lists some of these biblical kinds and gives us some guidance in our understanding of the various kinds. Since various species can interbreed, we can conclude that those species are from the same created kind. The division is probably somewhere around the family level in our current classification systems.
Chapter 2 of
Evolution Exposed: Biology explains this idea in more detail.
So, within the created kinds, we see changes in characteristics over time—or “descent with modification.” That is a commonality in the biblical and evolutionary understanding of life on earth. The disagreement comes in the amount and direction of that change.
Let’s think about the deer kind for a moment. The deer kind (family Cervidae) includes moose, elk, whitetail deer, mule deer, muntjac, fallow deer, reindeer, and many other species. This includes a wide range of sizes, colors, and antler structures.
We also know from Scripture that representatives of the deer kind would have been aboard the Ark—otherwise, they wouldn’t be here today. As these animals spread across the globe after the Flood, they encountered different environments and climates. They also carried with them a complement of genes that had been placed in them by their Creator. Those genes were expressed in various ways in various environments creating new species of deer over time.
So, how is this not the same as evolution?
Evolutionary concepts of descent with modification ultimately require the addition of new information over time in order to get from a dinosaur to a bird, for example. The biblical model does not require new information. In fact, the biblical model is confirmed by the fact that we see a loss of information as these species adapt to various environments. This is what we would expect as the world continues to deteriorate after the Fall. (See “
Is Natural Selection the Same Thing as Evolution?” in
The New Answers Book 1.)
So, the characteristics we see in deer around the world today were present in the genetic makeup of the deer kind aboard the Ark. Thinking about antlers as a trait, moose have palmate antlers, mule deer have tined antlers, and caribou have a mix of both. From this we can reason that the original deer kind had a mix of these features, and, over time, some species lost the genetic information to make the palmate antlers (elk and mule deer) and some species have become primarily palmate (moose). This is the kind of change that is consistent with what we find in Scripture and the kind of change I was referring to in the book."
https://answersingenesis.org/creation-science/baraminology/not-so-common-descent/
.
