young earth creationism

while examining ID, i encountered some creationist arguments against Stephen Gould's punctuated equilibrium that seem to work much better against young earth creationism. to wit,

2. PE amounts to a claim that inbreeding is the most major source of genetic advancement in the world. Apparently Steve Gould never saw Deliverance...

and the Biblical flood account is a claim that every animal now living is a result of inbreeding. the next claim doesn't precisely apply to creationism, but a fairly analogous claim would:

3. PE requires these tiny peripheral groups to conquer vastly larger groups of animals millions if not billions of times, which is like requiring Custer to win at the little Big Horn every day, for millions of years.

and young earth creationism requires that the species of animals alive today managed to drive into extinction a vastly larger number of species in just a few thousand years on a planet that was virtually unpopulated.

incidentally, answersingenesis.org, or AIG, gives the date 2304BC for the flood. and here's some interesting hermeneutics from AIG about the word "kind"

For example, horses, zebras and donkeys are probably descended from an equine (horse-like) kind, since they can interbreed, although the offspring are sterile. Dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals are probably from a canine (dog-like) kind. All different types of domestic cattle (which are clean animals) are descended from the Aurochs, so there were probably at most seven (or fourteen) domestic cattle aboard. The Aurochs itself may have been descended from a cattle kind including bisons and water buffaloes. We know that tigers and lions can produce hybrids called tigons and ligers, so it is likely that they are descended from the same original kind.

Woodmorappe totals about 8000 genera, including extinct genera, thus about 16,000 individual animals which had to be aboard. With extinct genera, there is a tendency among some paleontologists to give each of their new finds a new genus name. But this is arbitrary, so the number of extinct genera is probably highly overstated. Consider the sauropods, which were the largest dinosaurs—the group of huge plant-eaters like Brachiosaurus, Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, etc. There are 87 sauropod genera commonly cited, but only 12 are ‘firmly established’ and another 12 are considered ‘fairly well established’.5

source: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i2/animals.asp

so this creationist site acknowledges that species have evolved in just the last 4300 or so years, yet creationists constantly claim that evolution is impossible, by defining evolution as the development of new genera. it strikes me as flagrant sophistry to condemn the author of "origin of species" (not origin of genera) while allowing speciation within genera--with the exception of genus homo, of course.