I have enough difficulty figuring out the best definition of species, let alone subspecies.
A half century ago, at least some “creation scientists” seemed to put a lot more emphasis on hybrids being a primary explanation for why fossils “falsely” looked like evidence of evolution. Now it seems like the focus is on embracing as much high speed evolution as possible without actually calling it that. Yet, considering that Greek and Roman authors of 2000 years ago describe animals which sound remarkably similar to today’s animals, why is that “hyperspeed speciation” so hard to observe in a time frame around one-half of the time span since Noah’s Flood?
Ken Ham used to say (and I thought that the Ark Encounter still does in its exhibit diagrams) that all of that post-Flood speciation took place in the first hundred years after the animals left the ark. (I have no idea how Ham made that determination—other than the convenience of such a miracle coming at the very time the earth needed to be repopulated.) So I wonder if AIG is moving more towards a continuous hyper-speciation model.
At Answers in Genesis it seems likes every new scientific discovery is “totally shocking to evolutionists” but not shocking to biblical creationists who accept “God’s infallible Word over man’s fallible word.”
Meanwhile, AIG also argues that the Theory of Evolution is so extremely flexible and consisting of mostly “just so stories” which fit absolutely any new discovery, then why would anybody be shocked at all? How can they have it both ways?
It just seems like if hyperspeed speciation has been so rampant since Noah’s Flood, we should be observing “transitional forms” in countless varieties everywhere we look. Isn’t that always their complaint about evolutionary theory—not enough “transitional forms” found in the fossil record? If their hyper-speciation hypothesis is true, why don’t we see far more variation and subspecies in “real time”? If evolutionary biology and paleontology lack sufficient “intermediate forms”, shouldn’t their accelerated speciation model require even more impressive examples of transitions?
For that matter, if Noah’s Flood is allegedly responsible for most of the world sedimentary rocks (almost the entire geologic column, according to many YECs), shouldn’t the “fossil column” be mostly a “freeze frame” view of just the species and subspecies living when the flood drowned them all?
I have a hard time tracking their scattershot model. (It’s almost as if there really isn’t one! )