Evolution (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, July 15, 2009, 23:16 (5405 days ago) @ David Turell

I was a bit puzzled by DT's comment in the "Why is ..." thread where he says: "there is still no evidence for macroevolution, only microevolution". Isn't the above an example of macroevolution? Or do you mean something else by the term?
> 
> Thanks for showing us that link. To paraphrase Darwin: he said that little bitty steps to make an organ must be present. If an organ could not be made that way, it would negate his theory. Gould, again paraphrased, said that one of the paleontologist secrets of the tree of life is all we had were fossil tips and nodes of the tree. He and Eldridge invented the term punctuated equilibrium to try to explain the skips in time and form. What Dawkins showed in the website were analagous and he stated chemical confirmation (homologous) of the fossils presented, again which were large jumps between forms. This confims macroevolution occurs, but not in the tiny steps Darwin envisioned. We still do not know how macroevolution is achieved: large jumps or tiny steps. That issue is of major importance to arriving at a final and definitive theory of evolution.
> I am sorry I was somewhat obtuse. - Thanks... I was trying to figure out how to process "evolution definitely happened" and "macroevolution is unproven." - Is part of your grander argument one of "there is a general build from less complex to more complex, leading to us?"

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"