I must reiterate that this is not intended to be a challenge to come out and fight. I’m not sitting around waiting to pounce on an Evolutionist‡
, just hoping to have a good discussion.
With regard to microevolution, it may surprise you that I fully accept both microevolution (defined as evolutionary changes within a species) and macroevolution (defined as evolutionary changes at or above the level of species).
If you have billions of microevolutionary steps, is the final result still a microevolution from the initial organism?
The short answer is, absolutely. The problem is, you are imagining microevolution as a directional process progressing towards bigger and better life forms. Let me illustrate, suppose you left Paris at ~34 m above sea level and started walking around Europe. 1 billion small steps later (obviously a VERY roundabout way) you ended up in Berlin also ~34 m above sea level. What was your net change in altitude...0 m. You might have wandered high into the Alps or down to the coast, but 1 billion small steps later your net change was 0. Microevolution (and macroevolution for that matter) is not an upward progression of increasing complexity (in fact, often there is a decrease). Rather, it is a built in process of variation over time to enable organisms to adapt to a variety of environments. Similarly, on your way to Berlin you could cover a limited range of altitudes but no number of steps would ever get you to the moon.
And why are we so similar to "lower" primates, instead of looking completely different from any other living being?
If we were completely unique beings in our design then human biological research would be at a stand-still. It is very reasonable that God would reuse a working model (a hypothesis which I will not expound on now) so we could study E. coli, baker’s yeast, fruit flies, roundworms, zebrafish, chicks, mice, and, yes, even monkeys to learn about our own
biology (humans share genes with all of these organisms). Brilliant, if you ask me.
I will not oblige you by answering your other off topic questions. Although, feel free to read the following article to see why there are body size limits for exoskeletons (Scaling in biology: The consequences of size
). However, I’ld like to ask you an on topic question…assuming you accept a materialistic origin of life, what is the evidence that convinced you that all life as we know it is related?
Hold the Fort,
Edited by Ehud, 29 November 2012 - 05:26 PM.