After the spread of nutrient over inland areas and the spreading of the heavier seed by flying animals, the open plains, prairie and other places where water only passes through, fill with trees and plants. The land is now covered in most places by some sort of locally suitable vegetation, though only near rivers or large bodies of water is there any animal life on land.
The animals made now are those which go to a water source to drink, rather than live in the water. God perhaps does not decide at this time which animal is for Man's use; cattle, horses, domesticated or wild. Mankind will choose. [James 3 v 7] Yet to see some animals perform one wonders if domestication was a pretext in the design! Some kinds are extinct in the wild while domesticated populations live with Mankind in quantity.
Some things I must leave to you the reader;
was the horse [etc.] designed to be domesticated?
Is the hippopotamus a land or water creature?
Where do we put the large flightless birds?
Plenty of room for opinion so, have fun.
[Observation: domesticated animals are often; mammals, pack or herd species, plains or grassland forms.]
I will suggest as many have said or thought before; that God would create mongrels not pedigree genera. Not new, but the next portion may well be.
Reproduction of modified forms.
If we look at the detail in the second account in Genesis 2 v 7,21,22; where a rib is taken from Man to be fashioned into Woman, what does this suggest in our present day [2004 C.E.] technology? God seems to be making some things from scratch or raw material [man] others by manipulation of tissue [woman]. Believers have staunchly supported the everything after its kind, before we knew tissue could be modified. Looking at it this way the rib [removed under anaesthetic] is taken as literal, the tissue source. Perhaps we forgot to note [doctrinal misogyny?] Woman was not made directly from the humble dust! What is God telling us? If animals and plants could be made like Man [from scratch], then these could also be made like Woman [modified from similar]?
[We should note however the lifeform is still sourced from dust via the original form made, the ordinary minerals of the Earth. Today we have not been made from dust for many generations, this source however shows when we die.]
In present day manufacture we do find similarities, a new item is manufactured and then variations [some minor some major] of it are also made, different purposes, situations, new models. After some time it becomes more and more problematic to modify, a fresh start is called for with radical changes. Later this new design also will be developed into variations. This may explain the puzzle of similar animal groups which appear as a cluster, close in the fossil record. God makes one, then modifies.
Would any manufacturer today, wishing to develop their patent product in the marketplace, fail to consider variety? Take the car / automobile; colour, size, saloon, estate, off road, open top, sports, engine size, export market. Even to sell sweets to children think, colour, flavour and lasting.
Would the Creator knowing the animal just made could be produced in/for various; latitudes, altitudes, specials and all rounders, fail to be as proactive as man?
Maybe Darwin was partly right but not right enough. The system adjusts itself; Acts 17 v 26 even humans differ with latitude. While Darwin's cronies have demolished the fourteenth century idea of a Bible kind, that idea was an interpretation of the time, a time when few actually read the whole scriptures. Consider 1Corinthians 15 v 39 [context 15 v 35-
Scientists ever thinking of funding and scores, announce;
“We have found ten new species”, this sounds great!
What were these is enquired?
A beetle, a spider, a moth, a frog, a bat, a bird, a fish, a dog, a cat, and a fly.
A child proudly says “should have come in my Garden, I got all those kinds already”.
“And I got swaps too.”
In this, Darwin did prove that what man can do, Nature can do; that is all.
Before Darwin the pigeon breeders were at work and after him, this was not new.
next: 1 v 26 The Sixth Day, part 2, Image, Diminutive.