Macro Vs. Micro Evolution

[Ringer]

Speciation and Macroevolution Ernst Mayr, 1982

Punctuated Equilibrium Comes of Age Gould & Eldridge 1993

Macroevolution is more than repeated rounds of Microevolution D.H.Erwin 2000

 

And a few thousand other publications would seem to indicate you are mistaken.

 

Oh. It appears I was mistaken, thank you for pointing that out. I was always under the impression that macro-evolution was a term coined by anti-evolutionist to muddy the waters of the evolution debate because I had never encounter the word otherwise, or I've just forgot when it's been used. My mistake.

[jeskill]

To add on to what immortal was explaining ....

 

Mutations occur via a random process (e.g. mistakes in DNA replication). However, the main processes that cause a mutated trait to be selected for or against are NOT random. I'm talking, of course, about natural selection and artificial selection. (Mutation = random; selection = not random)

 

There is one evolutionary process that randomly causes a change in allele frequency over generations (i.e. evolution). It's called genetic drift, but genetic drift tends to only have a strong effect on small isolated populations.

Edited May 23, 2012 by jeskill

[sammy7]

name='immortal' timestamp='1337799838' post='679800']

No, wait. This reminds me of the Shakespeare's problem. A monkey is given a typewriter and it is asked to type the word SHAKESPEARE consisting of 11 alphabets. Now if the monkey starts typing randomly it is very unlikely that it is going to type the word SHAKESPEARE at one go or at one single attempt but if we intoduce a certain constraint that if the right alphabets are in the right places then the slots will be set to default and the monkey continues to randomly type for the remaining slotted locations. For example: if the monkey type it as

 

S G I M E Z H U L R F

 

Then the alphabets S, E and R are the right alphabets at the right position so we keep them up and try to jumble the rest. So it is very much likely that we are going to type the word SHAKESPEARE given enough time. Hence evolution works by accumulating good designs. This example might be misleading it looks like as though evolution has some predestined purpose to get the word Shakespeare it was just an example to show that how selection pressures operate to produce macro forms by accumulating good designs.

 

In the above example we can get snapshots of how the word Shakespeare appeared, for example at one point in time it can look like

S G I M E Z H U L R F

 

it may transform into this after some time

S Q U K E W P J A R B

 

Or at the present moment to this

S H A K E S P E A R E

 

 

In this way evolution works by random mutations followed by non-random selections i.e evolution works by cumulative selection i.e accumulation of good designs.

 

And also don't confuse evolution by natural selection with the origin of language and meaningful sentences, it is a different topic altogether and hence your analogy is irrelevant.

 

hay. this is not reality. the above locks in place when it is correct. i am going to make another thread on the impossiblity for mutations to generate any new "information" like what n-d-t says they do.

[mississippichem]

hay. this is not reality. the above locks in place when it is correct. i am going to make another thread on the impossiblity for mutations to generate any new "information" like what n-d-t says they do.

 

That's the idea. Favorable traits get selected for and tend to stick around.

[the asinine cretin]

Here's what my imaginary creationist might say.

 

1. The algorithm that settles on S H A K E S P E A R E over many iterations of random character selection assumes a teleology. For us that teleology is explained by the Intelligent Designer and you've just illustrated the plainly evident signature of that Designer. You're blinded by Naturalism, Darwinism, and Atheist religion and therefore your darkened intellect refuses to see it.

 

2. Laboratory experiments show that natural selection has fitness costs and that Darwinism alone cannot account for fitness and new information. Therefore, we hypothesize that an Intelligent Designer is in some sense operating in nature to bring about a purposeful, and directed evolution of life - of course with humans at the top ready to know, love, and serve Him in this world in order to be happy with him in the next.

 

Give up your faith in Random Chance and apprehend the presence of the Intelligent Designer. The Bible is true.