Can those of you who are devout evolution worshipers give me an example of macro-evolution?

Question

As a Christian, I can see where Micro-evolution exists..survival of the fittest and all. But Macro-evolution, where a species takes on the form of another species, well I can't. So other than the "missing link" can you give me an example.

Putting your faith into something and believing it to be real is worship. Evolution, regardless of what you say, is a THEORY. Therefore if you are putting faith into this theory and believing that it is true..in fact you are worshiping it in some form.

P.S. I ask this here because it is the topic of discussion here quite frequently.

Answer 1

Posting a science question in the religion and spirituality section often means the asker does not really want an answer. His goal is to ask a question that he believes proves some scientific knowledge to be wrong, or that science does not yet answer, and make the implicit claim that the only other explanation is a god, and specifically, the same god he happens to believe in.

It's the "god of the gaps" - intellectually bankrupt, since it favors ignorance instead of knowledge, and because of the contained logical fallacy.

However, on the off chance that you really want to know the answer:

Nobody worships evolution. Do you worship gravity?

29 evidences of macroevolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

---

Claim CB901:
No case of macroevolution has ever been documented.

Response:

1. We would not expect to observe large changes directly. Evolution consists mainly of the accumulation of small changes over large periods of time. If we saw something like a fish turning into a frog in just a couple generations, we would have good evidence against evolution.

2. The evidence for evolution does not depend, even a little, on observing macroevolution directly. There is a very great deal of other evidence (Theobald 2004; see also evolution proof).

3. As biologists use the term, macroevolution means evolution at or above the species level. Speciation has been observed and documented.

4. Microevolution has been observed and is taken for granted even by creationists. And because there is no known barrier to large change and because we can expect small changes to accumulate into large changes, microevolution implies macroevolution. Small changes to developmental genes or their regulation can cause relatively large changes in the adult organism (Shapiro et al. 2004).

5. There are many transitional forms that show that macroevolution has occurred.

---

Claim CB902:
Microevolution is distinct from macroevolution.

Response:

1. Microevolution and macroevolution are different things, but they involve mostly the same processes. Microevolution is defined as the change of allele frequencies (that is, genetic variation due to processes such as selection, mutation, genetic drift, or even migration) within a population. There is no argument that microevolution happens (although some creationists, such as Wallace, deny that mutations happen). Macroevolution is defined as evolutionary change at the species level or higher, that is, the formation of new species, new genera, and so forth. Speciation has also been observed.

Creationists have created another category for which they use the word "macroevolution." They have no technical definition of it, but in practice they use it to mean evolution to an extent great enough that it has not been observed yet. (Some creationists talk about macroevolution being the emergence of new features, but it is not clear what they mean by this. Taking it literally, gradually changing a feature from fish fin to tetrapod limb to bird wing would not be macroevolution, but a mole on your skin which neither of your parents have would be.) I will call this category supermacroevolution to avoid confusing it with real macroevolution.

Speciation is distinct from microevolution in that speciation usually requires an isolating factor to keep the new species distinct. The isolating factor need not be biological; a new mountain range or the changed course of a river can qualify. Other than that, speciation requires no processes other than microevolution. Some processes such as disruptive selection (natural selection that drives two states of the same feature further apart) and polyploidy (a mutation that creates copies of the entire genome), may be involved more often in speciation, but they are not substantively different from microevolution.

Supermacroevolution is harder to observe directly. However, there is not the slightest bit of evidence that it requires anything but microevolution. Sudden large changes probably do occur rarely, but they are not the only source of large change. There is no reason to think that small changes over time cannot add up to large changes, and every reason to believe they can. Creationists claim that microevolution and supermacroevolution are distinct, but they have never provided an iota of evidence to support their claim.

2. There is evidence for supermacroevolution in the form of progressive changes in the fossil record and in the pattern of similarities among living things showing an absence of distinct "kinds." This evidence caused evolution in some form to be accepted even before Darwin proposed his theory.

Answer 2

Okay, first let's clear up this thing about 'macroevolution'. There is no real difference between microevolution and macroevolution, in fact the terms are just about useless. Large changes in organisms over time are just the cumulative result of small changes. There is no fundamental difference between a large change and a small change, one just takes longer than the other. I suppose you could define macroevolution as being the same as speciation while microevolution is changes inside a species (for example, house cats into tigers is speciation, but caucasian humans into oriental humans is not as the two can still breed with each other successfully), but if that's what you mean then 'speciation' is really a more accurate term.

Of course, seeing large-scale speciation within such a short period of time as human history is unlikely. Human civilization has been around for only about 10000 years, while the Earth has been evolving life for no less than 3700000000 years- three hundred and seventy thousand times as long. Asking evolutionists to find a speciation event is sort of like asking astronomers to find a planet formation event. It's just something that takes so long we haven't had time to definitively observe it.

That said, cases of speciation or near-speciation have been observed in human history, and speciation in the fossil record has most certainly been observed. Here are some links for you:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_45
http://darwiniana.org/transitionals.htm

Answer 3

So-called microevolution means a small change within a species. If microevolution occurs, then obviously, eventually thousands of such small changes will accumulate. No-one in their right mind would look at two organisms that differ in thousands of different ways, and insist that they are one and the same species. Pretty basic, really. I know this because I am a biologist. But I worship only the Lord God Who made created the universe, and designed the process of biological evolution, as well as all other natural processes.

Answer 4

What you call "macro-evolution" is called speciation in scientific terms. It happens daily. The easiest examples are in bacteria, as they reproduce quickly. Another example is the Mosquito found in the London Underground. After 100 years, it developed completely seperatly from the outside mosquitos, and evolved to the point that it is a different species than the outside ones. The AP just did a story on this, you can google it, as it's only a week or so old.

Answer 5

how many evolutionary biologists do you think are hanging out here? try asking in the science section... or better yet take a class. for a short answer... think of your so-called micro evolution... now expand that over millions of years... look at it like a tree... divergent traits continue to diverge... (and just because one trait develops, doesn't mean those members of the species without that particular trait become extinct)
and btw... no one "worships" evolution... but i think you knew that

Answer 6

Microevolution is a change in allele frequency in a population over time. Macroevolution is the development of a species, or speciation. So, for example (hypothetically): If a group of fish is split into two groups (say for instance they are in a lake that has dried up partially, so there is a land barrier between them), then it is possible over time for these two species to become incapable of reproducing due to evolving different adaptations (possible that they are exposed to different predators, eat different kinds of food, etc.) "One example of natural speciation is the diversity of the three-spined stickleback, a marine fish which, after the last ice age, has undergone speciation into new freshwater colonies in isolated lakes and streams. Over an estimated 10,000 generations, the sticklebacks show structural differences that are greater than those seen between different genera of fish including variations in fins, changes in the number or size of their bony plates, variable jaw structure, and color differences."

Answer 7

Here's a list of observed events of speciation - new species arising from a different existing species:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

If you are impatient, skip to section 5, but the introductory material is helpful too.

Answer 8

I like this question.

BTW the snake now days do not have feet but this is after the curse. The serpent in the garden of Eden was a snake before the curse and that can explain 'the feet' : )

And gravitation is a part of the creation package.

Answer 9

You can't worship evolution. That just doesnt make sense. Study and believe evolution is another matter. Look at the fossil records. They go way further back than the bible does.

The Syko Ward

Answer 10

1. There is no such thing as an "evolution worshiper".
2. It's not my job to explain basic scientific theories to you. Read a book, or go get a degree in Anthropology. I have one, and have found it quite helpful.