Do you also admit that it is nearly impossible to remove personal bias from ones interpretation of the fossil record?
And unitl the theory is proven (prolly not with our lifetimes) I am inclined to go with what I can see and that is that evolution, at least in the micro scale, does in fact take place
I would agree, although probably not in the same way you mean it. I would suggest that it is not mutation that changes a species on the micro scale to have things like longer beaks or higher slam-dunks. Rather I think it is environmental changes that modify the sample of the population that survives. That is, the number of bugs resistant to DDT that could have originally been produced from the gene pool never changed, just the number of bugs that survived and bred. DDT resistent bugs didn't "appear" they just had a reason to become more prevalent. If DDT ever goes completely away then the population sample will eventually revert to the same mix of resistant and non-resistant bugs that existed before its use.
and that macro (whether halting, lumbering or skipping) logically explains long term speciation.
It can, but I still posit that the details of the mechanism must be demonstrated before I am called an idiot for being skeptical.
Shalom.
Of course. No doubt about it. But arch-bias is by no means a reason to throw out the entire fossil record.
I would agree, although probably not in the same way you mean it. I would suggest that it is not mutation that changes a species on the micro scale to have things like longer beaks or higher slam-dunks. Rather I think it is environmental changes that modify the sample of the population that survives. That is, the number of bugs resistant to DDT that could have originally been produced from the gene pool never changed, just the number of bugs that survived and bred. DDT resistent bugs didn't "appear" they just had a reason to become more prevalent. If DDT ever goes completely away then the population sample will eventually revert to the same mix of resistant and non-resistant bugs that existed before its use.
Now we are getting somewhere. What causes some bugs to have higher tolerances to DDT in the first place? Without mutation all bugs would be the same in a given population after enough breeding. I lean towards a combo of both mutation (creating adaptive advantages) and environment (creating situations where advantages equal survival). Mutation within a population is the only clear means of adaptation, survival of the fittest.
It can, but I still posit that the details of the mechanism must be demonstrated before I am called an idiot for being skeptical.
I don't think I called you an idiot, can't see why I would either. The mechanics behind the operation seem to be pretty complicated but it's only a matter of time before someone figures it out.
EBUCK