Well, I suppose it's actually a darling little toddler at this point, but in reality this new field of "biology" (at least in the creationist mindset), was stillborn from the beginning.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/bara-what
Baraminology attempts to present a biblical classification of species based on the original "kinds", thus assuming microevolution in the years since the original "creation." The author, Dr. Todd Charles Wood, asserts that he uses "sophisticated mathematical formulas" to determine the original kinds that Adam would have named. He believes that these formulas, whatever they are, have led him to a categorization close to that of the so-called original. Funny, it looks like science, sounds like science, but alas, it is not science!
This purported "new field" is nothing but creationist apologetics wrapped up in the guise and rhetoric of science. It is a distortion, meaningless talk that is based on a story, not upon facts. How does one categorize the world's dolphins, which all look very much the same but are entirely different genus and species? They look the same, and Wood may even consider them the same "kind", but instead they are unrelated based on their DNA, a perfect example of convergent evolution.
The author believes that while a deal of progress has been made, there is much remaining in the field. Why yes, doctor, indeed there is, but it isn't the work that you think it is. By all means, use "baraminology" or whatever the deuce you want to call it, but the citizens of the reality-based community will rely on Mr. Linnaeus or Mr. Darwin for our categorization systems. They make so much more sense, don't they?
I promise the next post won't involve creationism. I'm getting tired of it myself: rather like the Hydra of Greek myth, you strike off one head of the stupid beast only to find that two more grew up in its place. And its breath is sheer poison.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/bara-what
Baraminology attempts to present a biblical classification of species based on the original "kinds", thus assuming microevolution in the years since the original "creation." The author, Dr. Todd Charles Wood, asserts that he uses "sophisticated mathematical formulas" to determine the original kinds that Adam would have named. He believes that these formulas, whatever they are, have led him to a categorization close to that of the so-called original. Funny, it looks like science, sounds like science, but alas, it is not science!
This purported "new field" is nothing but creationist apologetics wrapped up in the guise and rhetoric of science. It is a distortion, meaningless talk that is based on a story, not upon facts. How does one categorize the world's dolphins, which all look very much the same but are entirely different genus and species? They look the same, and Wood may even consider them the same "kind", but instead they are unrelated based on their DNA, a perfect example of convergent evolution.
The author believes that while a deal of progress has been made, there is much remaining in the field. Why yes, doctor, indeed there is, but it isn't the work that you think it is. By all means, use "baraminology" or whatever the deuce you want to call it, but the citizens of the reality-based community will rely on Mr. Linnaeus or Mr. Darwin for our categorization systems. They make so much more sense, don't they?
I promise the next post won't involve creationism. I'm getting tired of it myself: rather like the Hydra of Greek myth, you strike off one head of the stupid beast only to find that two more grew up in its place. And its breath is sheer poison.
Comments
Post a Comment