That quote in the OP is an example of using a lot of words in an arm-waving fashion, yet it provides no tangible information.
God did not make life in a simple form and allow it to evolve into more complex forms. Instead, he created basic “kinds” of complex plants and animals, which then reproduced “according to their kinds.” ( Genesis 1:11, 21, 24 ) This process, which continues today, has resulted in the earth being filled with the same “kinds” of life that God originally created.
The Bible does not specify how much variation can occur within a kind, as might result when animals within a kind interbreed and adapt to their environment. While some view such adaptations as a form of evolution, no new kind of life is produced. Modern research supports the idea that the basic categories of plants and animals have changed little over vast periods of time.
The Bible’s scientific accuracy in describing basic “kinds” of life strengthens its credibility in other areas, including history and prophecy.
Rather than actually answering any questions, it raises more questions. What does "kind" mean? What does 'basic "kinds"' mean? Does it mean species? Genus? Family? Order? Or what? Why doesn't the Bible specify how much variation can occur within a "kind"? It's easy enough to say that all dogs or all horses are the same "kind", but are these all the same "cat kind" or are they different "kinds"?





Even just the cheetah species is a complicated study of genetics and history. Unfortunately for the Bible, the study of cheetah genetics proves that the story of the flood is pure fiction. Such an event would have destroyed genetic diversity and the "survivors" on the ark would not have adequate genetic diversity for much of a future, let alone provide a foundation for the millions of species alive today.
More questions: Since species of plants, animals, and fish continue to be discovered, how can it be concluded that no new "kinds" are being produced? Since no new "kinds" of animals are wandering up Columbia Heights this decade, how can it be concluded that no new "kinds" of fish are evolving on a remote, isolated tributary of the Congo river? What "modern research" are they talking about? Quotes? Sources? What do they mean by "vast periods of time"? 1000 years? 4000 years? 65 million years? Is it "scientific accuracy" to make broad assertions without any specifics or proof? Can the Bible be considered credible when it includes the story of a global flood that is 100% fiction?
Does Watchtower explain how kangaroos and koalas got from Noah's ark to Australia? Nope. GB = Fail.
Edit to add: I guess pictures aren't resizing. Oops.