Re: [asa] donkey and horse

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 07:59:05 -0400 Dave Wallace <wdwllace@sympatico.ca>
writes:
> D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:
> > No, these do not qualify as evolving species in most YEC views.
> > Apparently most of the equids can be bred to produce sterile
> hybrids.
> > Mules and hinnies are well known. A zorse was recently noted.
> However,
> > there are some YECs who have more carefully calculated the
> capacity of
> > the Ark and decided that only one pair from each genus or family
> could
> > have been aboard. This requires rapid evolution of the several
> equid
> > species so that their offspring is sterile. Abraham had asses.
> Joseph had
> > horses. David had mules. Given the accepted dates, that's
> evolution in a
> > great hurry. Something similar can be argued about the felines,
> what with
> > ligers and tiglons. Arguing this point will be problematic, for
> the
> > capacity of the Ark seems to be highly flexible, depending on the
> > premises immediately needed.
> >
>
> Thanks, but if given time and environmental pressure would the
> examples
> of interbreeding likely become no longer cross fertile? In other
> words
> are they potential examples of evolution in action even if YECs do
> not
> consider them to be such?
>
> Dave W (CSCA)
>
>
Given the flexibility of the YEC argumentation, I have no idea. I suspect
it would depend on the individual and the situation. As to the science, I
see no reason why isolated species should develop stronger genetic
isolation. I understand that jackasses will not breed with mares if they
have ever had access to jennies. Can't document that, for I heard it from
a farmer years ago. But there are areas where there are feral horses and
burros, but there has not been, to my knowledge, any report of a feral
mule.
Dave (ASA)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Jul 8 19:15:10 2007