Does macro-evolution exist?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dm277H3ot6Y
-
In total there are 17 users online :: 2 registered, 0 hidden and 15 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 1000 on Sun Jun 30, 2024 12:23 am
11th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism: Macro Evolution
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
-
johnson1010
-
Tenured Professor
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
- 15
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 1280 times
- Been thanked: 1128 times
11th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism: Macro Evolution
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
-
johnson1010
-
Tenured Professor
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
- 15
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 1280 times
- Been thanked: 1128 times
Re: 11th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism: Macro Evolution
I wrote about this topic a bit in this thread:
http://www.booktalk.org/yes-evolution-t ... l?start=15
Where someone suggested that macro-evolution has never been seen.
Really, macro-evolution is a largely un-necessary term. All evolution is only ever micro-evolution. Meaning minute changes caused by reproduction and changes in genetic code. Nothing too drastic ever really takes place to the point where something so un-like the parents comes from a birth that they are a differen thing entirely. Your children will always look a lot like you, and necessarily they will be the same kind of animal that you are.
It is only through long chains of successive generations that changes emerge to the point that a new kind of animal, distinct and unable to cross breed with the original species emerges. This is the practical barrier that people like to label macro-evolution. Speciation, or the divergence of sister descendants until they are no longer able to interbreed.
All that really is though is micro-evolution acumulated over time. There is no macro-evolutionary event. No birth of the cross-species monster, born of two different beasts but different from both. That's only ever seen in horror movies where some lady has the child of the devil and a monster emerges, or from anti-science denialists who claim the only way to confirm evolution is if a duck gives birth to a snake.
But a duck giving birth to a snake is definitely not what macro-evolution is, nor is that kind of thing even remotely permitted by the laws of evolution.
As Aron points out, this would be the exact kind of result which would DISPROVE evolution, not make the case FOR it.
http://www.booktalk.org/yes-evolution-t ... l?start=15
Where someone suggested that macro-evolution has never been seen.
Really, macro-evolution is a largely un-necessary term. All evolution is only ever micro-evolution. Meaning minute changes caused by reproduction and changes in genetic code. Nothing too drastic ever really takes place to the point where something so un-like the parents comes from a birth that they are a differen thing entirely. Your children will always look a lot like you, and necessarily they will be the same kind of animal that you are.
It is only through long chains of successive generations that changes emerge to the point that a new kind of animal, distinct and unable to cross breed with the original species emerges. This is the practical barrier that people like to label macro-evolution. Speciation, or the divergence of sister descendants until they are no longer able to interbreed.
All that really is though is micro-evolution acumulated over time. There is no macro-evolutionary event. No birth of the cross-species monster, born of two different beasts but different from both. That's only ever seen in horror movies where some lady has the child of the devil and a monster emerges, or from anti-science denialists who claim the only way to confirm evolution is if a duck gives birth to a snake.
But a duck giving birth to a snake is definitely not what macro-evolution is, nor is that kind of thing even remotely permitted by the laws of evolution.
As Aron points out, this would be the exact kind of result which would DISPROVE evolution, not make the case FOR it.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
