“When I was a creationist, eventually I admitted that “microevolution” could happen. I figured that changes could happen within species, but it could never turn into a new species.
The problem is, as Carl Zimmer once said, “If you accept microevolution, you get macroevolution for free.” Macroevolution is just microevolution over time. Eventually, enough genetic and/or geographical drift occurs that they become new species — organisms that no longer breed with one another.
So if you believe in microevolution: Congratulations! You’re almost there!”
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/12/microevolution/
Lol- extrapolating from an entirely different biological process in no way bolsters your case- Micro and Macro evolution are entirely different processes-
[[Eventually, enough genetic and/or geographical drift occurs that they become new species — organisms that no longer breed with one another.]]
Good golly- You’re not goign to argue that speciation equates to macroevolution are you? Since hwen is LOSS of information a result in NEW non species specific ifnormation needed for Macroevolution? Go ply your snake oil elsewhere
Macroevolution ADDS NON Species specific information- MICROEvolution works on Species specific information- it has to- mutations can noly work on information that is already present and coded for- Macroevolution however MUST add non species specific information to ‘move a species beyond it’s own specific kind’ (in time)
Macroevolution doesn’t require mutaitons- mutations do NOT produce non species specific ifnormation. Macroevolution NEEDS lateral gene transference from another entirely different species to “ADD the info that is absolutely necessary IF a species is to gain the non species specific info necessary to move beyond it’s own kind” This is a VERY important key distinction between the two processes- again, Mutatiosn can noly work on info already present
Species have very specific, species specific paramters that limit the amount of change they can undergo- they can only undergo change within these very specific paramters, because hte coding simply is not present to create the necessary macroevolving changes needed for megaevolution- We know htese parameters exist after centuries of experiments and tests, which failed to EVER add non species specific info outside of hte parameters of specific species.
Simply, Altering genetic info via mutation, bound by species specific paramters, can never produce new non species specific info- it can only simply change info already present within the parameters of the code already present-
In order for non specieis specific info to be introduced though, the species MUST have the metainformation ALREADY present in order to deal with the invasion of non species specific info- As I mentioend in past posts, it’s not enough to simply suggest that a cell changes, you MUST explain how these singular changes affect ALL systems within the species- IF the species doesn’t have the metainformation to deal with these intrusions of non species specific info, the species will NOT remain fit, and will break down- simply htrowing NEW non species specific info into the fray is like throwing random noise into a finely tuned computer program and expecting it to ‘just work itself out’ without any higher metainformation controlling and conducting the noise in a meaningful manner- you MUST have the metainformation present BEFORE attempting to introduce NEW non species specific info, and htis introduction of NEW non species specific info is hte ONLY way a species can ‘break their species specific parameters, and move beyond their own kinds’
Simple adaptions as seen in microevolution do NOT have the capability of introducing new non species specific info OR to move a species beyond it’s own specific metainformation controlled parameters