Nevertheless, young-earth creationists have developed an entire pseudotheory about "created kinds," which they translate to Hebrew as "baramins," and study with "baraminology".
YEC, OEC and ID mostly share a common notion of "individually created kinds" (Hebrew מִין [min], "kind"; e.g., Genesis 1 11 25, 6 19 20; King James Bible [2013]).
For decades this problem has been staring us in the face: creationists are fine with microevolution (changes within populations), because they just see it as noise in the system, variation within created kinds.
Whereas the organization may claim that creationism is not discussed, the web links section has a group of links for creation websites and references to "baraminology 4, the study of the "created kinds", in its articles and materials.
It will be much more sophisticated than orthodox "creation-science" because it will shun created "kinds," a worldwide flood, and other topics that clearly point to episodes in the Bible.
However, by presenting such an opinion, they cut off the possibility that Noah took just "created kinds" of animals to the Ark that later evolved within the "kinds," a well-known tactic used to reduce the number of animals required on board the ark with Noah.
If they do not invoke devolution and argue for "evolution within created kinds" after "the global flood," starting from single pairs of animals to their recent diversification, as well as within the past 10,000 years, they became the most radical evolutionists ever to exist.
As we now know, the actual term chosen to replace creation science was "intelligent design," but the rest of Bennetta's predictions were eerily accurate (although ID has never really abandoned the commitment to special creation of "created kinds," only that explicit language [Matzke and Gross 2006; Matzke 2009]).
Tree diagrams as a way of representing relatedness is a pervasive element in exhibits that extends beyond science institutions; for example, even the Creation Museum in Kentucky contrasts evolutionary trees with a series of trees depicting separately created kinds, including a solitary and independent line for humans.
In other words, if (i) the ideas of created kinds in God's mind differ with respect to the intrinsic worth of the kind and with respect to the purpose of the kind, and if (ii) God's idea of woman was different from God's idea of man and so women have a different divinely determined purpose from that of men then (iii) it is possible that women are nobler than men.
But there are distinctions in worth among created kinds (and also among individuals, insofar as the causes of two individuals of the same kind might differ), and these distinctions are a function of the differences in the ideas of God, whom Marinella compares to an architect or painter, who effects the production of buildings or art-works through the formulation of an idea or plan.
