Observable science & the Bible say creatures reproduce with like kind, Any observable proof to the contrary?

Question

this question is mostly for Darwinists. If you choose to answer please do address my question and don't overlook it. Thanks.

Answer 1

True, in fact observations that the offspring from parents of different species (where offspring are possible) are sterile was one of the key lines of evidence that lead Darwin to evolution by natural selection. ie. that once two populations of the same species become different enough, they can't interbreed thus stay separate.

It is now established though, through many observations, that bacteria have and do pick up chunks of DNA from unrelated species of bacteria. A lot of their DNA is very mobile. I guess it depends on what you call 'kind'.

Answer 2

No,

Cats make cats
Fish make fish
etc

A catfish is a fish. It will eat fish, it can bite (kind of) , it has whiskers. Some can even strut around on their pectoral fins. But it is not a cat. No amount of breeding will make it one.

Fruit flies have been used forever to demonstrate all sorts of genetic proofs. Perhaps millions on millions of generations of fruit flies in laboratory settings ... Not one changed or mutated to become anything other than a fruit fly. Eye colors change, various mutations occur on occasion. But all are still fruit flies. Not one matured to walk on two legs or can formulate a question.

Some are nice to look at some are ugly as can be. There are different looking cats, fish, people... But no fish crawled out of the water and over many eons became a man or anything else. It was born a fish it gave birth to fish.

There is no proof to the contrary. Take all the theory, politics etc and show it to a fruit fly.... Be quick about it, the next generation hatches in a few days...

Answer 3

Different creatures have to be awfully close (horses and donkeys) to be able to produce offspring (mules) and if they ever succeed, they are sterile. The same goes for the recent supposed cat/dog hybrid I have seen on line, if it is not a hoax.

Supposedly, cats and dogs divereged from common ancestors so long ago that it should be virtually impossible to crossbreed them now.

These odd sports only serve to emphasize the rule that one can only breed with one's own kind. Otherwise, we'd see a lot more of those headlines from the Weekly World News:

GIRL GIVES BIRTH TO CHIMP IN TRAGIC SPERMBANK MIXUP!

I daresay there are plenty of people out there trying to see if it can be done, but I sure wouldn't.

21 NOV 06, 1629 hrs, GMT.

Answer 4

Absolutely. In fact, every commercially important plant or animal is a variant of the original wild type, in some cases so much so that the variant is no longer cross-fertile with the wild type, i.e. it's a new species. The fact that such variation occurs is one of two legs of the proof of the theory of evolution; the other is the existence of selection (either natural or artificial), which is obvious. Since the theory of evolution consists of these two elements and no others, and both are demonstrated facts, the theory is proved, and it is now correct to refer to the fact of evolution.

Answer 5

Yes. Observe Laura Bush and her Neanderthal husband.

Answer 6

Observable science recognizes mutations.