Some evolutionists ask you to define a KIND, heres a classic answer.
A wolf, a fox and a coyote and a chicken all stand side by side, see if you can point out the one that is not of that KIND.
If you use the bibles teachings and cross examine them with todays scientific facts/operational science, you'll see that science supports the bible.
13 comments
>>>>> A wolf, a fox and a coyote and a chicken all stand side by side, see if you can point out the one that is not of that KIND. <<<<<
A wolf, a fox and a coyote and a chicken all stand side by side, see if you can point out the one that is not of that KIND""
What about a fox, a racoon and a badger? Are they the same kind, similar kinds or not kind-related at all?
Citation needed on your second point.
The fox and the wolf are as likely to produce viable offspring as the fox and the chicken. Oh, and can you tell me if mice and rats are of the same "kind?" Because, genetically speaking, humans are more similar to chimpanzees than rats are to mice.
Perhaps the issue is a bit more complex than "well they look like they're the same kind."
Monkey, Baboon, Dog.
C'mon play.
There's so many others you would call kind, but you'll never play or define kind, under ACTUAL similarities. Science does.
You can keep playing this home schooled shit as long as you want, I guess, but you're only wrong.
Two of these things is not like the other
“A wolf, a fox and a coyote and a chicken all stand side by side, see if you can point out the one that is not of that KIND.”
“If you use the bibles teachings and cross examine them with todays scientific facts/operational science, you'll see that science supports the bible.”
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
