Talk:Anaconda

Bold textI have trouble with the phrase "God created four species on Day 6 of Creation,".

I agree that the snakes were created on the 6th day of creation, but is it correct to say that these four species were created then?

I think that creationist biologists have felt that within created kinds, or baramins, there may have been some development from creation to now, and that some species that appear now may not have been on earth immediately after creation. That is, the word 'species' is not well defined, and we may be setting ourselves up for needless criticism if we say that all species presently on earth were present immediately after creation. Creationist biologists are working hard to try to define baramins more accurately, and we may need to check with them before stating that certain species were always separate. Or perhaps we should reference some of the baramin studies.

--John Baab 09:35, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

I agree completely with you John. It is not correct to say that we know the original archetypes of what constitute the original kinds of life within Genesis. In fact I would say the original archetypes of design for the kinds of life within Genesis, that were created by God, are wholly different from what we now observe, they were much more powerful, majestic, and splendid, far more complex and ripe with more implication of the design of God than what we see now having to sift through the sinful layer built up over many thousands of years since man. This sin or life geared toward death, essentially survival of the fittest, has been in play for vast stretches of time and has degraded overall optimal design from which speciation took place within nature developing ancestral lines into what we observe today through many processes within biological evolution. --Tsommer (Tony) 13:28, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

When I was adding that anacondas were created by God on Day 6 of Creation, I was trying to fit it in to the beginning of the article in a way that flowed smoothly with the intro instead of flatly putting "God created anacondas on Day 6 of Creation" by itself at the end of the intro. I overlooked baraminology in doing so. My apologies. Bob Nashmer (Welcome, soldiers of the Lord) 15:56, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

No problem Bob, :)... Perhaps a new edit is in order. By all means go ahead and change it to reflect the position of the creationist community. --Tsommer (Tony) 15:59, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

Er, I see that you did already, good stuff! Perhaps instead of "Anacondas are cold-blooded vertebrates that were created by God on Day 6 of Creation."

It should be "Anacondas are cold-blooded vertebrates, of which the representative original kind was created by God on Day 6 of Creation."

What you think?--Tsommer (Tony) 16:00, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

"Representative original kind," although a concept at the forefront of the rapidly advancing creation science research, gives, at least to me, a slight hint at evolution. It kind of makes it sound as if anacondas have evolved from the "original" kind into what they are today (and we all know that never happened). If we're to include baraminological specifics into God's creation of anacondas, I think we should clearly show that they've never evolved and that only God was instrumental in their creation. Bob Nashmer (Welcome, soldiers of the Lord) 23:01, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

Yes animals evolve. And yes what was originally created has evolved into what we see today from original kinds not one kind, thus the difference between darwinian evolution and what I am talking about is clear.--Tsommer (Tony) 10:34, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

Even if what I wrote doesn't include baraminological specifics, I think it's satisfactory as is. Visitors without expertise in baraminology may be confused at "Anacondas are cold-blooded vertebrates, of which the representative original kind was created by God on Day 6 of Creation" and mistake it for atheistic evolution. Bob Nashmer (Welcome, soldiers of the Lord) 15:00, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

ok cool man, I gotcha, no worries.--Tsommer (Tony) 15:14, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

Looks good! --John Baab 10:52, 27 September 2011 (PDT)