How would young earth creationist explain Omicron Variants?

Upvote:6

Obviously it's a new thing.

Since your question hinges on the validity of this statement, it should suffice to address this.

First off, YECs don't deny that humans are capable of meddling. There are all sorts of organisms that have been tinkered with by humans, and there have been claims made (which I won't go into here, as this is not the appropriate venue) that NCoV is one of those. God created all the species that He created ~6kya. But YEC doesn't claim (to my knowledge, anyway) that it's impossible that humans might create species themselves.

Second, YECs don't deny that species vary within certain bounds. That would be lunacy, as is plainly evident when you consider dog breeds, or any other animal that's been the subject of human selective breeding. (Dogs make a good "poster child", as they're well known and show tremendous variation within what everyone acknowledges is a single "species".) Our Creator designed each kind of organism with the potential to adapt to a wide variety of environments, and that is plainly evident. When it happens without the help of humans, this is sometimes called natural selection. (Be aware that terminology in this area can become very murky.)

What is NOT seen is dogs turning into cats, or into anything else that isn't a dog. (Note, however, that the "dog" kind includes wolves, coyotes, jackals, and others; in fact, so far as we can tell, created kinds, or baramins, frequently β€” but not always β€” correspond to the family level. This diversity is more obvious in the feline kind, which ranges from house cats to ligers. The ability of these animals to interbreed, even if only in the manner of a ring species, is evidence of their common descent.) What is NOT seen is corona viruses changing into some other sort of virus. What IS seen is animals (and bacteria and viruses) reproducing "according to their kinds".

What materialists need to show, then, and what has never been observed, is an organism transmuting into a new kind of organism. In other words, your claim is false; there is nothing "obviously" new, and the assertion that it's new at all needs to be substantiated.

More post

Search Posts

Related post