What exactly does macro evolution mean?

Answer 1

(e-mail me and we'll discuss it)
"macro" evolution is a made-up word by Christians... it means the change of one species (like a fish or a reptile) into another species (like a mammal or - God forbid - man!)

To a scientist, macro-evolution (plus micro-evolution) are just parts of "evolution", period!

EDIT
"slime became alive" is NOT part of evolution

EDIT
monkeys didn't evolve into humans (not one scientist believes that)

Answer 2

They do not. Micro and macro evolution is a creations distinction. The creations microevolution, which they define as adaptation within "kinds", ignoring the impression of the term "kinds", is the only kind of evolution that happens. An accurate understanding of evolution makes it very obvious how this explanation is both sufficient and inevitably true. Creationists invented the distinction in order to justify denying the logical consequence of applying an undeniably observed process to a very long time span. The idea was the invent a barrier by calling what we observe one thing (micro evolution), and what would require more time to observe, which they were unaware we had observed and which they don't understand evolution well enough to recognize even if they were aware, something else (macro evolution). This creates the illusion of a barrier where in fact no barrier exists.

Answer 3

In a nutshell, macro-evolution is micro-evolution over long periods of time. Micro-evolution is small changes. If you add a million years into the mix, and you have many small changes over that period of time, eventually those small changes are going to add up. What you have at the end of a million years is going to be very different from what you had started with.

Answer 4

Microevolution means small changes withing a gene pool, e.g. beaks of finches, breeds of dogs, etc.

Macroevolution is an extrapolation of microevolution to support the hypothesis that given unlimited time, those small changes will add up to cross the species barrier, that is to say, that a fish can eventually become a reptile.

The SCIENTIFIC evidence does NOT support this hypothesis. Those hundreds of experiments with fruit flies over thousands of generations have NEVER produced anything but fruit flies. Along with other experiments, there is a genetic barrier that cannot be crossed.

Well, some may argue that that is still limited. So, what does the geologic column say? Species appear suddenly, stay unchanged for the time of their existence, and then became extinct.

I have no problem with macroevolution provided it is understood that it is an EXTRAPOLATION, and therefore falls in the realm of faith. Well, actually, it isn't even a correct extrapolation. If the scientific data is plotted on a graph, the gradient of the curve tends to zero. But (brain-washed?) evolutionists extrapolate from the early part of the graph, and then insist that it is fact.

Answer 5

Macroevolution refers to evolution that occurs at or above the level of species, in contrast with microevolution,[1] which refers to smaller evolutionary changes (typically described as changes in allele frequencies) within a species or population. The process of speciation may fall within the purview of either, depending on the forces thought to drive it. Paleontology, evolutionary developmental biology, comparative genomics and genomic phylostratigraphy contribute most of the evidence for the patterns and processes that can be classified as macroevolution. An example of macroevolution is the appearance of feathers during the evolution of birds from one group of dinosaurs.

There are two views of macroevolution: (1) that it is simply an extension of microevolutionary processes over large time scales, and (2) that it is disconnected from microevolution, or involves different processes, such as punctuational change and species selection. Some evolutionary biologists, particularly Charles Darwin and those subscribing to the modern synthesis, see the only difference between microevolution and macroevolution as being one of scale. Other evolutionary biologists, including Gould, Schmalhausen, Stanley, and Waddington, hold that microevolution and macroevolution represent fundamentally different processes.

Within the Modern Synthesis school of thought, macroevolution is thought of as the compounded effects of microevolution. Thus, the distinction between micro- and macroevolution is not a fundamental one - the only difference between them is of time and scale. This understanding is disputed by some biologists, who claim that there may be macroevolutionary processes that cannot be described by strictly gradual phenotypic change, of the type studied by classical population genetics.

Some creationists have also adopted the term "macroevolution" to describe the form of evolution that they reject. They may accept that evolutionary change is possible within species ("microevolution"), but deny that one species can evolve into another ("macroevolution"). These arguments are rejected by mainstream science, which holds that there is ample evidence that macroevolution has occurred in the past.[2][3]

Answer 6

In response to overwhelming evidence for evolution, some fundamentalists decided to invent different terms for evolution over different periods of time.

Basically it's like saying that an apple falling from a tree demonstrates micro-gravity, but there's still no evidence that I'd fall if I jumped off a cliff.

Answer 7

By saying ‘we accept micro but not macro-evolution’ we risk reinforcing the perception that the issue is about the amount of change, which it is not. It is about the type of change.

Change, no matter how small, which is unequivocally the right sort of change to ultimately cause real, informationally ‘uphill’ genetic change, has never been observed.

Answer 8

There really is no such thing. Change is change and that is evolution. The fundies are trying to draw a distinction between what humans have clearly observed in the short time we have been around, and common decent. But I have yet to hear of a mechanism that allows for change that wouldn't lead to big changes over a longer period.

Answer 9

Macro evolution is when one species evolves into a another such as monkey into man.
Micro evolution is when one species evolves within itself such as different types of king snakes.

Answer 10

It means things(evolution) will keep on happening as they always did!