As GourmetDan points out above, I'm about as dumb as they come, and so try as I might, I just can't find a definition for "macro-evolution" in your words above.
Nor can I see some way to distinguish micro- from macro-evolution.
And as I mentioned to Dan, I have here a 13 page article on the subject of macro-evolution, written from a scientific perspective and defending the idea against anti-evolutionists. This article can be summarized in just a few words:
Macro-evolution is nothing more than the sum of micro-evolutionary processes over long periods of time. That's it.
So I ask you too: which part of that, exactly, do you object to? In other words, where, in your mind does micro-evolution stop and macro-evolution begin?
[[As GourmetDan points out above, I’m about as dumb as they come, and so try as I might, I just can’t find a definition for “macro-evolution” in your words above.
Nor can I see some way to distinguish micro- from macro-evolution.]]
No, you’re not dumb Joe, You just have an a priori belief that gives a blind spot.
[[Macro-evolution is nothing more than the sum of micro-evolutionary processes over long periods of time. That’s it.]]
Yup- that’s the claim- but it’s an apologetic extrapolation where one should not, scientifically, exist because hte two processes are scientifically different.
Here’s a thread on FR discussing the differences- although I haven’t read through it- I suspect though that the biological differences between the two processes aren’t discussed- so I guess I’m goign to have to delve into the subject myself probably tomorrow or next day- I’m wiped out hpysically right now- but give this thread a quick read- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2202955/posts
Evolutionists assume that the small, horizontal microevolutionary changes (which are observed) lead to large, vertical macroevolutionary changes (which are never observed). This philosophical leap of faith lies at the eve of evolution thinking.
(as for no ‘real scientists’ beleiving htere is a difference) In 1980 about 150 of the world’s leading evolutionary theorists gathered at the University of Chicago for a conference entitled “Macroevolution.” Their task: “to consider the mechanisms that underlie the origin of species” (Lewin, Science vol. 210, pp. 883-887). “The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution . . . the answer can be given as a clear, No.”
http://www.icr.org/article/what-difference-between-macroevolution-microevolut/
[[Macroevolution is not just a whole lot of microevolution accumulated over a long period of time. Microevolution involves expression of recessive genes by removing dominant genes from the gene pool. Macroevolution would require the creation of new genes from scratch. They aren’t the same thing at all.]]
http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v8i2e.htm