I think I understand macroevolution better than you do.
Besides being a minister, I am also a biologist.
Micro and macro are the same process. It is allele frequency changes in populations over time. Macro is simply the result of accumulations of micro changes.
IT IS THE SAME PROCESS!!! SAME!!!!!!!
I think I understand macroevolution better than you do.
Besides being a minister, I am also a biologist.
Micro and macro are the same process. It is allele frequency changes in populations over time. Macro is simply the result of accumulations of micro changes.
IT IS THE SAME PROCESS!!! SAME!!!!!!!
B: I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Again parts of macroevolution do result from microevolution, speciation for example. But macroevolution sum toto, is not microevolution. Again, I strongly suggest you read the references I gave you. And the distinction between the two is not often stressed on the undergraduate level. I'm not a biologist. I'm a geophysicist who got his Ph.D. in the same Dept. where Steve Stanley teaches. So much of what I know about it came straight from one of the founders of macroevolutionary theory. If you want to argue that macroevolution is nothing more than an accumulation of microevolutionary changes, you'll continue to be in error. THis is true for speciation, but other processes like, mass extinctions, do not result from microevolutionary processes like drift or selection.
B: I realize that creationsits have greatly abused these terms, however, they are well defined by evolutionary biologists, and there's not point in ceeding our terminology because creationists have made a mess of it.