Originally posted by myelo
Then you don’t understand biologic evolution. It is the change in inherited traits in a population over time. Specifically, it is the change in frequency of alleles (gene variations) from one generation to the next.
Observed examples of evolution include the development of corn with high sugar content, the development of a chihuahua from a wolf, and the development of bacteria resistant to certain antibiotics. In each case, the changes are due to the change in frequency of genes within the population. This is, by definition, evolution.
Evolution is a theory and a fact. Just like gravity is a theory and a fact. There have been several theories debated over the years to explain how gravity works. But this debate doesn’t change the fact that if you jump off a cliff, you gonna hit the ground. And the debate over specific theories to explain the process of evolution doesn’t change the fact that evolution occurs.
It seems more like you are the one who doesnt understand the difference between micro variations/micro evolution/genetic variation (whatever you want to call it) and macro evolution.
I thought I explained it in my post. But I'll try again.
A micro event is the appearance and/or disappearance of existing and/or potential genetic traits through recombination of existing genetic code.
A macro event on the other hand is the emergence of entirely new and more advanced features through innumerable completely new genetically defined traits.
Proponents of evolutionism often fail to note the important difference between these two, simply calling them both “evolution,” and thereby deliberately blurring the distinction between them.
Genetic variation is a common phenomenon, perpetually manifesting itself as extant dominant and recessive genetic traits “appear” and “vanish” in successive generations within a population of organisms. A population’s adaptation through genetic variation is as much a fact of biological life as are genes themselves. Though some evolutionists like to call this phenomenon “micro-evolution,” the variations dictated by any gene pool are neither “new” traits, nor qualitative “changes” in the gene pool (as required for “macro-evolution”); their potential is already well-defined within the DNA of the population’s gene pool, and all possible changes (i.e., variations) within that population are limited specifically to those inherent traits.
---
As for your examples, genetically modified corn, the chihuahua and the wolf (?) etc, do you think it is correct to hold these up as examples of evolution? I mean, in fact they are nothing other than planned, controlled alterations performed by scientists/humans. If anyting they show that intelligent thought is neccessary for such development.
Show me one case of observed macro evolution.
