The distinction between "micro-evolution" and "macro-evolution" is a concept invented by creationists to try and divide and defeat the basic concept of evolution. These are artificial distinctions drawn by humans ... but nature does not draw a line between the two. Macro-evolution (the birth of species from ancestor species) is just micro-evolution on a longer time scale and applied to genetically isolated populations.
Creationists were caught in the quandary that the effects of short-term changes *within* a species over a few generations to selective pressures is undeniable. But they still deny that new species can arise from this process, even though speciation is the *very same process* ... specifically, natural selection.
2006-08-01 17:00:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by secretsauce 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
A Journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step - a variation produces a change and a variation in that change produces a greater change - and considering that big things like human growth occur first on a micro-scopic level and then become visible to us as a considerable change - then yes micro-evolution can indeed be deemed as evolution. Evolution has always occured on this scale - through variation, adaptation, natural selection and survival of the fittest.
2006-08-01 16:45:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do believe that micro-evolution is evolution, it's just on a much smaller scale.
Take Darwin's Finches. Scientists observing them said that they have smaller beaks because of the types of seeds now and that's evidence of a micro-evolution.
From Wiki, which supports the micor-evolution of Darwins' Finches
Microevolution is the occurrence of small-scale changes in allele frequencies in a population, over a few generations, also known as change at or below the species level.
These changes may be due to several processes: mutation, natural selection, gene flow, and genetic drift.
2006-08-01 16:43:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Alchemy303 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm pretty sure most of the evolution happens by natural selection, and that to me would be the true evolution, besides, when you say that with macroevolution new organisms are created, I don't know exactly what you mean cause all the organisms are a result of changes of a previous one, they don't just appear out of nowhere.
2006-08-01 16:45:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes....How many micro-evolution steps to get to a new species?
If you had an isolated population of Pugs on an island, eventually their genetic makeup would change enough to become a new species that would not be able to breed with other dogs.
Scientists are exploring that as I write this (not with Pugs) but with shorter life cycle animals (insects). It'll give a clue how long a population needs to be isolated for a species to occur.
2006-08-01 16:45:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
it could be evolution or a variation not quite sure
sure would like 2 find out....
2006-08-01 16:40:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Micro-"Evolution"
keyword: Evolution
lol
2006-08-01 16:40:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Emma H 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it is just a variation.
2006-08-01 16:40:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by SamWiseGamgee 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everyone! Go back and read Secret Sauce's answer again and again and again.
He's RIGHT!!!!!
2006-08-03 05:14:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
uhm it starts small to big whatever
2006-08-01 16:40:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by ibid 3
·
0⤊
0⤋