4 ms·
The distinction between micro and macro evolution is a typical strawman. Everything one can't deny anymore without looking incredible stupid is called "microevo
by stormking 9y ago
The distinction between micro and macro evolution is a typical strawman. Everything one can't deny anymore without looking incredible stupid is called "microevolution", the rest "macroevolution".
There are still many areas where we don't know the exact machanics, but evolution in itself is a fact.
- tertius 9y agoI think he merely means the difference between an organism silencing/expressing or losing genetic material or an organism gaining genetic material. Both can alter function. One is observed the other not (according to those who argue micro/macro).
- Ngunyan 9y agoI don't make a distinction between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. I used other people's terms to make clear which part of this theory of evolution I want proven. Evolution's core claim is that man evolved from other organisms lower in the evolutionary tree. This is what I want proven in a scientific manner. How can it be a fact if one does not know how one-celled organisms managed to evolve into humans? You can call it a fact once the mechanism is well-understood. Until then, it's not yet a fact. Evolutionists arguments, if you're paying attention, are in fact circular.