[mike182d]

Define "macro-evolution." Posit the mechanism by which "micro-evolution" ceases before becoming "macro-evolution." Once you've done this, we'll entertain your comments on the matter.

Micro-evolution: the minor adaptation of a species to its environment while remaining part of the same species (i.e. hair color or skin color)

Macro-evolution: the major adaptation of a species to its environment in such a way that it becomes an entirely new species.

The fundamental flaw of evolution is that it cannot establish causality. The design of mechanisms vital to the survival of a given organism are far too complex to be the product of mere randomness or radiation. For example: the flagellum of a bateria. This part of the bacteria is essential to the bacteria's existence as it allows it to move and obtain the resources needed to survive. However, the flagellum is built much like a motor, in that it is comprised of several seemingly unrelated parts that all work together to form the collective "flagellum." If any one of these parts were underdeveloped or non-existant, the whole system breaks down and the bacteria dies. The fact that all these miscellaneous parts that comprise the flagellum "evolved" by mere randomness at the exact same time is beyond all logical probability.

Sounds like intelligent design to me...

[Junior]

You forget natural selection. As for the flagellum argument, that was debunked years ago on these threads when it was pointed out the flagellum is simply the modification of another bacterial structure and was not sprung, full blown as it were.

So how does micro-evolution keep from bleeding over to macro-evolution?