Question

Creation science runs into problems sometimes because it is seen as not accounting for observed variations. Explain how these variations do not contradict "after its own kind."

I don't fully understand this question and my teacher didn't go through it with any detail.
plez help.

Answer 1

This... isn't a biology question, given that Creation 'science' is at best the use of half-truths and selected results to cram the world we see into a story told thousands of years ago (to note: I'm a Christian... Literal interpretation of Genesis is not required for faith or salvation.). I strongly urge you to find someone knowledgable about evolution and really try and understand the facts about it. I reccomend the book 'The Language of God' by Francis Collins if you want a balanced approach to religion and evolution.

That said, the answer to your question lies in the definition of 'kind'. If you define something's 'kind' to be large enough, then any varation within that group could be 'after its kind'. So, basically... the blue and purple snake is 'snake-like' just like the red and orange snake is 'snake-like' both are 'snakekind'