Re: =Questions for evolutionists=

[email protected] wrote:

> ==Questions for Evolutionists==
> 
> Why is there a "genetic wall" (sterility) between the different
> 'families' of lifeforms; dogs cannot produce offspring from cats,
> horses from ducks, ants from grasshoppers, ect, ect, ect.?
> 
> If no super intelligence was behind the formations of these different
> kinds of lifeforms, but only random chance, would not a person
> logically expect that most of these would be able to hybridize? (just
> like one would expect a supposedly close lower form and a higher form
> to hybridize; for ex. ape and human.)
> 
> But they can't under NATURAL conditions. Only varieties within the
> various kinds can reproduce.  (like house cats with lions, etc) 
> Why not try a reasonable approach that fits in with the true
> scientific knowledge of today?

You don't say why you'd expect common descent to
produce clades that can interbreed.  Natural evolution
is based on what works, whatever the pathway there.
It's messy, not a tidy, organized, consistent process
like a human-like genetic designer might approach it.

On the other hand you might also expect an aware
designer to occasionally start new "kinds" fresh from
the ground up.  This is also not found in nature,
every new clade is genetically derivative of something
that came before it.

Different species generally use different parts of the
genome for a given function.  A certain chromasome
location on one species doesn't necessarily serve the
same function as it would in another species.  In fact
closely related species don't generally even have the
same number of chromasomes.  Chimpanzees, for example,
have 24 pairs of chromasomes, while humans have 23.
Obviously they can't interbreed.  OTOH, humans and
neanderthals did.


> 
> God's word, the Bible,

is not a biology textbook.

>  says that each life form was created according
> to its "kind". (Ge 1:25) Thus, dogs started out as dogs as remain as
> dogs. Horses as horses, ect. There can be a lot of variety within a
> "kind". There are many different types of cats, dogs, ect. and they
> can all interbreed, but only within their own kind.
> 
> Doesn't that pattern at least show some intelligence?

No.  If lions could interbreed with house cats, why
would that compromise the success of either species?

(They can't, but it would be funny to see them try.
Lions and tigers can interbreed, though, but their
offspring are sterile.)

> 
> Since God put barriers between different families, it keeps the
> different families or "kinds" as unique and thus won't crossbreed out
> of existense. He did it so we can continue to enjoy or use them as
> they originally are. (cats as cats, dogs as dogs, etc)
> 
> Isn't this approach at least, plausible, and worthy of more scientific
> study?

What exactly is it that you think should be studied
further?  We already know that significantly divergent
species can't interbreed, and we know what prevents
it.

God's intent is a matter of religion, not science.

HTH.