|
Word Gems
exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
MicroEvolution vs. MacroEvolution:
The first is patently true, evidentially
around us everywhere, but the second is
fable, untenable materialistic dogmatism.
return to "Evolution " main-page
In the “ghost in the machine” article, I stated that Darwin feared for the success of his natural-selection theory when tested against the formidable challenge of the eye’s complexity.
This is true, but only to a point.
MacroEvolution refers to the coming into being of individual species. Darwinists teach that, over great periods of time, one species will sort of meld into another new species. Natural selection, with genetic mutation, they say, will bring this about. But the theory of macroevolution faces insurmountable difficulties and cannot possibly be true as it stands.
MicroEvolution, however, is part of our common knowledge and experience. No one doubts it, nor should it be doubted. This kind of evolution applies to variation within a species. For example, we have very small dogs and very large dogs, but each fundamentally is a dog and remains so. This kind of change is widely found everywhere in the animal and plant kingdoms; moreover, the “natural selection” is often purposefully aided by animal and plant breeders to produce all manner of variety of fauna and flora; but only within a species.
|