How can animals change within' their species, yet the theory of evolution doesn't work?

Question

I'm really confused now!! I was just told that the Bible allows for "some" evolution within species...wouldn't that allow for all evolution between species too?

For instance, one person said that it only takes two dogs (male and female) to produce all the dog types we have today...That means two greyhounds could eventually produce a little silly, white, dirty-mouthed, yappy, foofy dog...Is this correct?

It just seems that this reasoning would then allow for more than just intraspecies evolution. How can there be some sort of evolution without allowing for all types of evolution? Seriously, I'm trying to understand, but I don't feel I'm getting it...

Answer 1

Yes, I think it is ridiculous too. Of course we cannot show it within the space of a few years, for evolution to fully occur and break species boundaries, we'd have to have millions of years. However, I think the drastic differences between, say, a labrador and a chihuahua, shows how if we can do that in just a few yrs, anything is possible.

Plus, it is not fair enough to say we'd have to change a dog into a cat etc for the theory to be verified - Dogs and cats are not from the same family... and plus, many creatures + common ancestors that would have bridged the gap between species (e.g. between man and monkey) have now died out.

Answer 2

Do you wish to honestly ask this question, or are you here to criticize and make fun? Because I quote, from your last question:

"I grew up Christian and I ain't never heard some of the crazy things you talkin' 'bout...Please list the Bible you got that 'mazing info from, so I can go an'a buy me a book of magic spells too....I'ma gonna' make me a water canopy...Yee Haw!!!"

That bespeaks to the concept of having an argument, which I am not here to do. I am here to answer questions on a Question and Answer site.

To answer your question, are you familiar with the scientific theories that surround evolution? The reason I ask, is that you use the term "Evolution" rather broadly, and in a non-descript manner. In one instance, as a verb, and in another instance, as the scientific theory.

To answer the question for any that may be sincerely interested in the topic, the scientific laws allowing for variety within a species are as widely accepted as nearly anything, and usually proposed and truly accepted by evolutionists. I accept the laws that allow for variety, but as I will describe below, those same laws have demonstrated that evolution runs into severe problems trying to use them as the modus operandi for the evolution of a species into another species. That is why theories such as Punctuated Equilibrium, Evolution due to mutation, and other such theories came into existence. I'm rather shocked that if you believe in the theory of Evolution, you do not accept these scientific facts. As they are scientific facts, they quite easily explain why Noah would not have had to take on every type of animal. But simply because scientists try to use it to prove evolutionary theory does not mean the laws they are quoting do not exist.

I am rather surprised if anyone who accepts evolution as a fact is not familiar with these laws, as they are tantamount and neccessary for the theory of evolution.

We are not aware of what animals Noah took on the Ark. We do know the space allowed on the Ark was immense, roughly the same area that was available in the Titanic. (Interestingly enough as well, the proportions of the Ark have been demonstrated to be the most stable proportions for a sea going vessel by modern naval architects. How would a Jewish writer know this?). Regardless, I digress. We are not aware of what kinds of canines Noah brought onto the Ark. This is because God more than likely splits animals into different kinds, differently than humans do. He could have had Noah bring two domestic dogs on the Ark, Two Hyenas, and Two Wolves, etc. All canines.

This obviously allows for great variety within the kind. But the problem arises that the theory of evolution in that you can only take it so far. If you try to create a new species, then the offspring become sterile, and cannot reproduce. You can let a Stallion run with a Donkey but due to genetic chromosonal differences (Donkey's have 62 chromosomes, horses have 64) the resulting Mule offspring are nearly always sterile, and cannot reproduce to a 2nd generation.

Any breeder of animals (Dogs, Horses, Cats, etc) understands these laws, and works with them. It's how we got varities such as the Scottish fold. We just had some sicko in Toledo arrested last year for breeding the elbows out of Cats, so they they couldn't jump up on the furniture and scratch. But anyone recognizes, any breeder, and any scientist, that you cannot, ever, breed a new species. They remain cats. If they could have, they would have done so already. There seems to be a genetic law in place to stop it.

Non biased sources (just a few of the thousands that are out there) are listed below.

As to the Water canopy? Well, that's not surprising, because Christendom rarely teaches the Bible well, and are usually the ones who betray it the most. In addition, translation of Hebrew is a very tricky thing. The water canopy is a perfect example. Genesis chapter 1 (Reading it especially in the original Hebrew) describes the water canopy.

A good translation from the original Hebrew (Though it's a bit tricky) is as follows:

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

And God made the firmament; and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so." - Genesis 1:6,7 BBE Version

Then turn over to Genesis 6:17, where it states: "And as for me, here I am bringing the deluge of waters upon the earth"

If you read the original Hebrew, "deluge" is actually: "ham mab'bul" or "And as for me, here I am bringing the heavenly ocean upon the earth"

Answer 3

You have made an astute observation.

All dogs that exist today are descendants of wolves, and we humans bred them to fit us as pets. That means it has taken less than 10,000 years. If you select and breed the proper offspring (i.e. always go for the smallest, silliest, whitest etc puppy), you can indeed breed yappy, foofy (etc) dogs from greyhounds. It will probably take hundreds of generations, though...

There is not ONE universal, Christian approach to Evolution. Creationists like to claim they speak for all Christians, but they are still a minority among them.

Answer 4

Dogs will always be dogs. Always have been. Yet within the canine species, we have wolves, foxes, coyotes, and the domestic critters.
Interesting to note that when a wolf and a Siberian Huskey are cross-bred, we have a Malamute, which is a recognized breed.
Breeding Malamutes brings more Malamutes.
Cock-a-poos? (sorry, Cocker Spaniel/Poodle hybrid)
Jack Russel Terriers?
All evolutionary "new" breeds within the canine species.

Himalayan cats? Same thing in the feline species.
(Siamese bred with an Angora)

Mules? (Horse and Donkey both within the equine species)

Answer 5

This is the difference between microevolution and macroevolution. Scientists have tried to use selective breeding to change a species as much as possible but have found that they eventually hit an inpenetrable wall. Yes, we can make dogs smaller and smaller but eventually you hit a wall with that. You can't make one the size of a mouse or a horse. You can't give one the leaping ability of a cat. It will always remain a dog. The species line cannot be crossed, yet the creator allowed for adaptation within species to have the ability to adapt to differing environments.

Answer 6

The Bible does not allow for "evolution", only species adapting.

Evolution has been declared complete BUNK by those in the know.

But, that does not stop evolutionist in there ever hatred and denial of G*d being the creator from trying. And that's all they do is TRY, TRY and TRY.

Always coming up with a skull and tooth from somewhere trying ever vainly to prove they are right. So far, they have been WRONG.

But they keep trying....

Answer 7

There is no reason. This is a fall-back position. The opponents of evolution said that it could not happen. Then it was demonstrated, so they said it could happen within a genus, but no more. They offer no proof -- no mechanism can be demonstrated -- but given the slow pace of evolution, they will be dead before their lie is conclusively disproven.

Answer 8

Well, with your example, grey hounds and (lets just say) poodles would have a common ancestor, but are in no way directly related. Just as humans didn't come from monkeys, we came from a common ancestor.

Evolution, after all, is just small adaptations over a grand amount of time. I think 4 billion years would be about right, wouldn't you?

Answer 9

The bible is incorrect and evolution does work.

I think that was the sort of answer you are looking for?