Difference between revisions of "Linnaean taxonomy"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(→‎Later developments since Linnaeus: Cleanup and Spell Check, typos fixed: concensus → consensus, unneccesary → unnecessary, seperate → separate)
 
(14 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 12: Line 12:
 
******** '''Species'''
 
******** '''Species'''
  
Linnaean taxonomy was originally developed as a [[physicotheology | physicotheological]] system in which nature was viewed as another testament of [[God]] to be read much like the [[Bible]]. By seeking to document the patterns of concinnity in Creation, Linnaeus and his peers hoped to elucidate the mind of God<ref>[http://www.linnaeus.uu.se/online/history/natursyn.html "Linnaeus' view of nature"], Linn&eacute; On Line</ref>. It was not originally meant to describe a system of biological descent, which Linnaeus, a devout Christian and creationist<ref>[http://www.linnaeus.uu.se/online/history/bibeltro.html "Faith in the Bible and Creation"], Linn&eacute; On Line</ref>, would have considered shocking<ref>[http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/linnaeus.html "Carl Linnaeus"], biography</ref>. Linnaean also applied his taxonomy to [[mineralogy]]<ref>[http://www.linnaeus.uu.se/online/history/mineralog.html "Linnaeus as a minerologist"], Linn&eacute; On Line</ref>, but that usage has been superseded by [[chemistry | chemical]] classifications.
+
Linnaean taxonomy was originally developed as a [[physicotheology|physicotheological]] system in which nature was viewed as another testament of [[God]] to be read much like the [[Bible]]. By seeking to document the patterns of concinnity in Creation, Linnaeus and his peers hoped to elucidate the mind of God.<ref>[http://www.linnaeus.uu.se/online/history/natursyn.html "Linnaeus' view of nature"], Linn&eacute; On Line</ref> It was not originally meant to describe a system of biological descent, which Linnaeus, a devout Christian and creationist,<ref>[http://www.linnaeus.uu.se/online/history/bibeltro.html "Faith in the Bible and Creation"], Linn&eacute; On Line</ref> would have considered shocking.<ref>[http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/linnaeus.html "Carl Linnaeus"], biography</ref> Linnaeus also applied his taxonomy to [[mineralogy]],<ref>[http://www.linnaeus.uu.se/online/history/mineralog.html "Linnaeus as a minerologist"], Linn&eacute; On Line</ref> but that usage has been superseded by [[chemistry|chemical]] classifications.
  
[[Evolution | Evolutionists]] inherited the Linnaean system from the Christian founders of [[biology]] and tried to adapt it to the Darwinian worldview of ever-transmogrifying species. However, since the Linnaean system describes a fixed creation with no way for members of one order or family to move to another order or family, this Neo-Linnaean Synthesis has always been problematic.
+
[[Evolution]]ists hijacked the Linnaean system from the Christian founders of [[biology]] and tried to adapt it to the Darwinian world view of different species all sharing a common ancestor, a view which is contraindicated by the [[Bible]]. However, since the Linnaean system describes a fixed [[Creation]] with no way for members of one order or family to move to another order or family, attempts by [[Evolutionist]]s to introduce [[phylogeny]] (the alleged common ancestry of completely different animal species) were bound to be riddled with contradiction.
  
While the system is still in almost universal use for the naming and categorizing of creatures -- especially in the form of the [[binomial nomenclature]], where species are given a scientific, Latinate name comprised of a generic and specific descriptor (e.g. the common [[wombat]] is known as ''Vombatus ursinus'') -- it has largely been replaced as a framework for describing origins by creation science's  [[baraminology]] and the evolutionists' [[cladistics]].
+
While the Linnaean system is still in almost universal use for the naming and categorizing of creatures—especially in the form of the [[binomial nomenclature]], where species are given a scientific, Latinate name comprised of a generic and specific descriptor (e.g. the common [[wombat]] is known as ''Vombatus ursinus'') -- it has largely been replaced as a framework for describing origins by creation science's  [[baraminology]] and, in the [[evolutionist]] theory, by the theory of cladistic [[phylogeny]].
 +
 
 +
==Later developments since Linnaeus==
 +
 
 +
Over time, our understanding of the relationships between living things has not changed, but the corruption of science by [[Evolutionist]]s has meant that scientists in [[liberal]] universities increasingly believe in [[phylogeny]], the fallacious belief that fossils supposedly show that different types of animal share the same ancestor.
 +
 
 +
[[Phylogeny]] directly contradicts the [[Bible]], which quite clearly states,
 +
{{cquote|'''Genesis 1:25'''<br />And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.}}
 +
This discredits the theory of [[phylogeny]] by showing that different species of animal had separate ancestors which were created by [[God]] on the fourth and fifth days of [[Creation]].
 +
 
 +
Evolutionists claim that a weakness of Linnaeus' method was that he could only base his scheme on the structural similarities of the different organisms. However, this was arguably a better approach than making unsubstantiated claims that the different animals had the same ancestor. [[Evolutionist]]s accused Linnaeus of [[polyphyly]], which is the unwarranted inclusion in a taxon of species which did not descend from the same common ancestor. However, since no different species descended from the same common ancestor, it turns out that Linnaeus was right all along.
 +
 
 +
Despite this, [[Evolutionist]]s continue to try and make Linnaeus' [[God]]-given taxonomical divisions conform to the factually unproven and morally dubious claim that different animals come from the same ancestor by haphazardly transplanting the animals from one taxon to another depending on the latest hypothesis about their ancestry, which not only leads to ambiguity over the nomenclature conventions for various species, but is also bound to confuse the animals themselves.
 +
 
 +
Originally, Linnaeus established three kingdoms in his scheme, namely [[Plant]]ae, [[Animal]]ia and an additional group for [[minerals]]. In an unnecessary attempt to alter his theories, early [[Evolutionist]]s made up three new kingdoms and needlessly moved many organisms in and out of them:[[Monera]], for [[prokaryote]]s (i.e., bacteria); [[Protist]]a, for protozoans and most algae; and [[fungus|Fungi]].  More recent [[Evolutionist]]s have invented still more categories, and transplanted more animals into them: [[Bacterium|Bacteria]] and [[Archaea]], which contain the prokaryotes, and [[Eukaryote|Eukaryota]]. These arrangements are constantly being remade and confusingly altered, and are not a clear improvement on Linnaeus' original system, which is still compatible with the Biblical consensus.
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>
 +
 +
[[Category:Biology]]
 +
[[Category:Botany]]

Latest revision as of 15:17, June 27, 2016

Linnaean taxonomy refers to the taxonomic system developed in the 18th century by Carolus Linnaeus wherein life forms are classified according to a ranked hierarchy.

The basic hierarchy (leaving out the sub- or super- ranks, and other more technical ranks) is as follows:

  • Domain
    • Kingdom
      • Phylum
        • Class
          • Order
            • Family
              • Genus
                • Species

Linnaean taxonomy was originally developed as a physicotheological system in which nature was viewed as another testament of God to be read much like the Bible. By seeking to document the patterns of concinnity in Creation, Linnaeus and his peers hoped to elucidate the mind of God.[1] It was not originally meant to describe a system of biological descent, which Linnaeus, a devout Christian and creationist,[2] would have considered shocking.[3] Linnaeus also applied his taxonomy to mineralogy,[4] but that usage has been superseded by chemical classifications.

Evolutionists hijacked the Linnaean system from the Christian founders of biology and tried to adapt it to the Darwinian world view of different species all sharing a common ancestor, a view which is contraindicated by the Bible. However, since the Linnaean system describes a fixed Creation with no way for members of one order or family to move to another order or family, attempts by Evolutionists to introduce phylogeny (the alleged common ancestry of completely different animal species) were bound to be riddled with contradiction.

While the Linnaean system is still in almost universal use for the naming and categorizing of creatures—especially in the form of the binomial nomenclature, where species are given a scientific, Latinate name comprised of a generic and specific descriptor (e.g. the common wombat is known as Vombatus ursinus) -- it has largely been replaced as a framework for describing origins by creation science's baraminology and, in the evolutionist theory, by the theory of cladistic phylogeny.

Later developments since Linnaeus

Over time, our understanding of the relationships between living things has not changed, but the corruption of science by Evolutionists has meant that scientists in liberal universities increasingly believe in phylogeny, the fallacious belief that fossils supposedly show that different types of animal share the same ancestor.

Phylogeny directly contradicts the Bible, which quite clearly states,

“ Genesis 1:25
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
”

This discredits the theory of phylogeny by showing that different species of animal had separate ancestors which were created by God on the fourth and fifth days of Creation.

Evolutionists claim that a weakness of Linnaeus' method was that he could only base his scheme on the structural similarities of the different organisms. However, this was arguably a better approach than making unsubstantiated claims that the different animals had the same ancestor. Evolutionists accused Linnaeus of polyphyly, which is the unwarranted inclusion in a taxon of species which did not descend from the same common ancestor. However, since no different species descended from the same common ancestor, it turns out that Linnaeus was right all along.

Despite this, Evolutionists continue to try and make Linnaeus' God-given taxonomical divisions conform to the factually unproven and morally dubious claim that different animals come from the same ancestor by haphazardly transplanting the animals from one taxon to another depending on the latest hypothesis about their ancestry, which not only leads to ambiguity over the nomenclature conventions for various species, but is also bound to confuse the animals themselves.

Originally, Linnaeus established three kingdoms in his scheme, namely Plantae, Animalia and an additional group for minerals. In an unnecessary attempt to alter his theories, early Evolutionists made up three new kingdoms and needlessly moved many organisms in and out of them:Monera, for prokaryotes (i.e., bacteria); Protista, for protozoans and most algae; and Fungi. More recent Evolutionists have invented still more categories, and transplanted more animals into them: Bacteria and Archaea, which contain the prokaryotes, and Eukaryota. These arrangements are constantly being remade and confusingly altered, and are not a clear improvement on Linnaeus' original system, which is still compatible with the Biblical consensus.

References