Difference between revisions of "Macroevolution"
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.<ref>http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html</ref>}} | ...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.<ref>http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html</ref>}} | ||
| − | The term macroevolution is often hated by militant evolutionists (especially evolutionist poseurs who knew that evolution is lie and an ill attempted escape from biblical authority) because they are unable to demonstrate that macroevolution occurred nor are they able answer the reasonable objections/questions posed to them by biblical creationist (for example, the 15 questions for evolutionists of the [[Question evolution! campaign]])<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref> | + | The term macroevolution is often hated by militant evolutionists (especially evolutionist poseurs who knew that evolution is lie and an ill attempted escape from biblical authority) because they are unable to demonstrate that macroevolution occurred nor are they able answer the reasonable objections/questions posed to them by biblical creationist (for example, the 15 questions for evolutionists of the [[Question evolution! campaign]])<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref><ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/10/evolutionist-posers-naive-evolutionists.html Naive evolutionists, evolutionist poseurs and the headlights of the Question Evolution! Campaign]</ref> |
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 04:13, May 22, 2014
Macroevolution is a distinction made by Creationists that separates the change of certain characteristics of a species, from the changes that natural selection, mutations, and genetic drift can, given enough time, lead to the creation of new groups of organisms consisting of a single common ancestor and all the descendants of that ancestor (see Clades). Modern biologists do not make a distinction between microevolution and macroevolution, but instead group it under the general theory of Evolution. The rationale for this is that the change of characteristics inside a species is the primary factor in the definition of a species, thus invalidating an absolute description of species, but instead rendering all members in a species to follow a bell curve of differentiation, thus allowing the rise of a new species.
Dr. Roger Lewin commented after the 1980 University of Chicago conference entitled “Macroevolution”:
| “ | “The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. … At the risk of doing violence to the positions of some of the people at the meeting, the answer can be given as a clear, No.” | ” |
In 1988, the prominent Harvard University biologist Ernst Mayr wrote in his essay Does Microevolution Explain Macroevolution?:
| “ | Among all the claims made during the evolutionary synthesis, perhaps the one that found least acceptance was the assertion that all phenomena of macroevolution can be ‘reduced to,' that is, explained by, microevolutionary genetic processes. Not surprisingly, this claim was usually supported by geneticists but was widely rejected by the very biologists who dealt with macroevolution, the morphologists and paleontologists. Many of them insisted that there is more or less complete discontinuity between the processes at the two levels—that what happens at the species level is entirely different from what happens at the level of the higher categories. Now, 50 years later the controversy remains undecided.
...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.[2] |
” |
The term macroevolution is often hated by militant evolutionists (especially evolutionist poseurs who knew that evolution is lie and an ill attempted escape from biblical authority) because they are unable to demonstrate that macroevolution occurred nor are they able answer the reasonable objections/questions posed to them by biblical creationist (for example, the 15 questions for evolutionists of the Question evolution! campaign)[3][4]
See also
External Links
References
- ↑ Dr. Roger Lewin, “Evolution Theory under Fire,” Science. Vol. 210, 21 November 1980. p. 883-887, as quoted by Dr. http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=116
- ↑ http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html
- ↑ 15 questions for evolutionists
- ↑ Naive evolutionists, evolutionist poseurs and the headlights of the Question Evolution! Campaign