Micro vs. Macro continued

Discussion in 'Creation vs. Evolution' started by Administrator2, Feb 8, 2002.

  1. Administrator2

    Administrator2
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Administrator: Two emails came in today with this subject. They are presented here in the order of their arrival. The second one is not a response to the first.]

    HELEN

    A number of times it has been claimed that macroevolution is
    speciation. I and others have tried to point out that speciation is a
    variable concept depending on the mating cues of the animals involved
    and is therefore not a reliable pointer genetically or physically.
    From the glossary, p. 637, of Mark Ridley's undergraduate textbook
    Evolution, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1993:

    "Macroevolution: Evolution on a grand scale: the term refers to
    events above
    the species level; the origin of a new higher group, such as the
    vertebrates, would be an example of a macroevolutionary event."



    In other words, creationists were NOT making up that definition.
     
  2. Administrator2

    Administrator2
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    KEVIN KLEIN

    A new paper published by scientists at UCSD provides tantalizing new
    evidence of possible mechanisms for evolution. Some selected quotes
    from the news"]http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/science/mchox.htm]news
    release[/URL]:
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Biologists at the University of California, San Diego have
    uncovered the first genetic evidence that explains how large-scale
    alterations to body plans were accomplished during the early evolution
    of animals.

    In an advance online publication February 6 by Nature of a paper
    scheduled to appear in Nature, the scientists show how mutations in
    regulatory genes that guide the embryonic development of crustaceans and
    fruit flies allowed aquatic crustacean-like arthropods, with limbs on
    every segment of their bodies, to evolve 400 million years ago into a
    radically different body plan: the terrestrial six-legged insects.

    The achievement is a landmark in evolutionary biology, not only because
    it shows how new animal body plans could arise from a simple genetic
    mutation, but because it effectively answers a major criticism
    creationists had long leveled against evolution-the absence of a genetic
    mechanism that could permit animals to introduce radical new body
    designs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    For those interested, the actual paper is published
    http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/dynapage.taf?file=/nature/journal/vao
    p/ncurrent/index.html]here[/URL].



    [Administrator: Helen also posted this article in the media thread, with a response from Discovery Institute.]
     
  3. Administrator2

    Administrator2
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    RUFUSATTICUS

    Before the waters get too muddy, I would like to clarify the differences
    between macroevolution and microevolution. Macroevolution and
    microevolution actually refer to the same biological process,
    evolution. What differs between them is the frame of observation.
    Macroevolution refers to differences between species. It is mostly
    reflected in morphological changes exhibited in the fossil record and the
    differences between extant taxa. Microevolution refers to differences that
    occur within a species. It is mostly reflected by biological studies
    conducted on extant populations of organisms. This distinction is mostly
    due to different fields working on the same thing and having different
    perspectives. The terms reflect the bimodal origins of Evolutionary
    Biology. At one point in history the distinction was very much important
    because some scientists argued that the mechanisms for intra-species
    differences and inter-species differences were fundamentally different.
    However, it became apparent as science progressed that macroevolutionary
    differences are actually the result of the accumulation of microevolutionary
    differences. The following thread also discusses the relationship between
    the terms.
    http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=36&t=0001
    14

    Again, don't take my word for it; read the literature for yourself and
    consult an evolutionary biologist (like me).

    Finally here are my preferred definitions.
    Evoltion: The heritable change in a population's traits over
    time/generations.
    Microevolution: Evolution apparent within a population or species.
    Macroevolution: Evolution apparent between population or species.

    -RvFvS
     
  4. Administrator2

    Administrator2
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    CRAW4RD

    The following definitions come from the the book,
    From So Simple A Beginning, The Book Of Evolution.
    by, Philip Whitfield
    who is an evolutionist.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Macro-evolution,
    The evolution of new species and the large scale patterns of evolution
    above species level.

    Micro-evolution,
    The small genetic changes that take place in populations within a single
    species. These changes represent the replacement of particular genes by
    similar genes already present in low numbers in the population. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I have often thought that speciation has been included in the
    macro-evolution definition so that those who subscribe to evolutionism
    can claim they have proof of macro-evolution.
    My own personal opinion is that an animal must be considered as a
    represenative fom a new taxonomic ranking of genus or and what I
    consider the main qualifier is to develope or modify a new or existing
    body part to the point inwhich is serve a new and useful purpose.

    Craw4rd
     
  5. Administrator2

    Administrator2
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    PATRICK PARSON

    If that's the standard, then the Institute for Creation Research admits
    macroevolution exists. They endorse Woodmorappe's "Ark Feasibility Study",
    in which he admits new species, genera, and families exist.

    Most creationists have retreated to macroevolution as meaning new orders of
    organisms. They don't have much more room; all that's left is class,
    phylum, and kingdom.
     
  6. Administrator2

    Administrator2
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    HELEN

    Everyone's own opinions aside, Futuyma seems to be a recognized expert
    by the evolutionists here on this board, so this is from him:

    Macroevolution: A vague term for the evolution of great phenotypic
    changes, usually great enough to allocate the changed lineage and its
    descendants to a distinct genus or higher taxon.


    Futuyma, D.J. 1998. Evolutionary Biology. 3rd Ed. Sinauer
    Associates, Inc. Sunderland, MA. (glossary)
     

Share This Page

Loading...