Evolution (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, July 31, 2009, 16:30 (5390 days ago) @ xeno6696

But here's a key question, how many of those changes would it take before you would be willing to call it a new species? Part of my own confusion about your evolutionary distinctions hinges on that. 
> 
> Actually, what is your definition of micro and macroevolution... because I picked up Pigliucci's book again - If you look at Wiki micro is at the species level and macro above that. In my Webster Collegiate that approach is generally supported. Micro is small changes within species, leading to evolutionary changes, and macro is more complex changes within evolution. Pigliucci's definitions are his, and perhaps not mine. What matter? You and I will discuss evolution and use our own individual terms, which we should understand for each other. How many changes for a new species (?); we have covered before. There is no fine line as previously pointed out, and until we have DNA studies on everything, those inexact lines will remain. Remember Gould told us there is an extreme paucity of transitional fossils. Not yet found or never present? We do not know. (Sci Am, Oct, '94)Or 'One species may appear to be descended from another, but the fossil record does not show how one evolved into another.' (The Evolutionists, the Struggle for Darwin's Soul, 2001)