| bdbdbd said: Oh, i just noticed you had a microevolution-macroevolution discussion going. The macroevolution argument you see from creationists, is only a rhetoric "trap" to jam the discussion. Basically the demand to prove macroevolution would be to prove it doesn't happen via microevolution. @Manus Justus: I'd remember reading a couple of years ago about a study/studies concerning atom spins and delayless information transport, where the results referred back to causality. Can't remember what study it was, or where i specifically read it. |
We have had some good times bdbdbd, remember Eternal Darkness? Sigh...
But, i can't disagree with you more.
MACRO and MICRO are words in use by scientist. It is a way to specify specifically what you mean. Even if you buy all of the theory of evolution, it is good to have to different defintions for the 2 different processes.
Just like with Stem Cell there are Adult and Embryotic, but they are all Stem cells.
And it only makes sense, take a simple math problem:
You say M=M+M+M+M
Add if I told you the value of M was 8 the problem would be false.
but it clarifies by saying M=m+m+m+m
Macro = mini-Micros
The Micro only talks about the Gene Expressions in organisms and mutations and Natural Selection. This is proven science the rest is unproven speculation.
Read Highwaystar's article about Mammal/ Whale evolution.
and my comments.
