Evolution Explained (Well, kinda, you'll see...)

AtheistAviB
AtheistAviB's picture
Posts: 71
Joined: 2007-06-07
User is offlineOffline
Evolution Explained (Well, kinda, you'll see...)

Now, while the actual scientific community (Behe, Dembski, and Gish scientists) makes no distinction between Micro and Macro-Evolution (given that they are the same thing with the only differentiating factor being length of time), I shall momentarily use the aforementioned terms in an effort to break something down for the genetically less fortunate among us.

 

Micro-evolution is undisputed. Seemingly because this is completely obvious given the clear changes we see in species and the thrusts in biology that have come about as a result of the said changes and predictions that followed. However, the religious right has launched a war on the idea of some species coming about from others due to evolutionary processes. While it is clear that their arguments hold no water scientifically, it is not commonly pointed out that in accepting micro-evolution they have in effect accepted macro-evolution and are contradicting themselves.

 

Over long periods of time through the process of evolution we are able to see changes on small scales that opponents of the generally accepted notion of evolution refer to as Micro-Evolution. These small periods, say perhaps 50 to 100 generations, that we map out in the species we are studying provide ample evidence of this, so for them to argue this point would be futile and hence they do not.

 

Macro-Evolution is said to be impossible because on their account species CANNOT evolve into other species. However, here is the scale through which it would occur:

 


              Original Species:                                                       G

                                                                                            /  \

 Different appearances due to "micro-evolution"                  GH  GI

                                                                                         /        \

New change in species over several generations               HJ          IK

(Notice: What made original species distinct=gone)         /                 \

Same species continues to change                              JL                    KM    

(Notice how far removed now)                                  /                            \

Over many generations new species forms           LN                               MO

 

The final formations now share common characteristics with the last step from which they emerged yet they can no longer breed with it or perhaps the earlier forms from which it evolved due to a mass amount of evolutionary changes over time.

 

Perhaps this is a bit too watered down but it's something that may help explain this process nonetheless.


zntneo
Superfan
Posts: 565
Joined: 2007-01-25
User is offlineOffline
I could be wrong but isn't

I could be wrong but isn't the spilt in the "tree" caused by separation in geographic space? That might be a good thing to add to it, if it's true.


AtheistAviB
AtheistAviB's picture
Posts: 71
Joined: 2007-06-07
User is offlineOffline
zntneo wrote: I could be

zntneo wrote:
I could be wrong but isn't the spilt in the "tree" caused by separation in geographic space? That might be a good thing to add to it, if it's true.


The factors that lead to all the different splits are numerous and far too many to specify (Ranging from competition, to random mutation, to change in magnetic fields, to geographic change, etc.).This is a very base generalization of the process, so I was as non-specific as possible.


zntneo
Superfan
Posts: 565
Joined: 2007-01-25
User is offlineOffline
I was just thinking that

I was just thinking that saying a few of them might be helpful. Some people won't understand the speciation process. I still don't completely understand it.