The First Principles of Created Kinds

[T_aquaticus]

@AJRoberts

No, there are gaps and forms of nested hierarchies in creationist models as well .

None of those models are supported by any reasoning or mechanisms. They aren’t predictions from first principles.

@AJRoberts

This is an unsupported inference. Creationists (or evolutionists critiquing creationists) cannot make any predictions about which “mixtures” (using your word) of phenotypic traits are more likely between different created kinds.

If they can’t predict which mixtures of features should or shouldn’t exist as part of creationism then a nested hierarchy can’t be a prediction of creationism.

@AJRoberts

I don’t see how anyone can do this either.

This is the main criticism of Meyer’s work. He looks at a fossil and pronounces that it doesn’t have any ancestors.

@AJRoberts

This seems like an absurd assertion. We know where the gaps are because of observations - observations free of any interpretive paradigm.

Really? Then why did we think there was a gap between dinosaurs and birds and not between mammals and birds? Why is there a presumed gap between humans and apes and not humans and dogs?