How has what us creationist call " macro evolution" advanced civilization in any...

mopar mike

New member
...way shape or form? How has the idea of one kind of animal evolving to another advanced us in any way shape or form as a civilization ? I'm not talking about variations and adaption of viruses or bacteria, or some animal developing a valve as a result of pro longed exposure to a certain environment, I mean one animal such as a land animal evolving into a whale ? Is anyone aware of any major scientific advancement's as a result of this very weak scientific theory ? Thanks in advance for your answers. God bless.
 
Russian entomologist Yuri Filipchenko (or Philipchenko, depending on the transliteration) first coined the terms "macroevolution" and "microevolution" in 1927 in his German language work, "Variabilität und Variation". Since the inception of the two terms, their meanings have been revised several times and even fallen into disfavor amongst scientists who prefer to speak of biological evolution as one process.

The term "macroevolution" frequently arises within the context of the evolution/creation debate, usually brandished by creationists alleging a significant difference between the evolutionary changes observed in field and laboratory studies and the larger scale macroevolutionary changes that scientists believe to have taken thousands or millions of years to occur. 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. The consensus of the scientific community is that the alleged micro-macro division is an artificial construct made by creationists and does not accurately reflect the actual processes of evolution. Evolutionary theory (including macroevolutionary change) remains the dominant scientific paradigm for explaining the origins of Earth's biodiversity. Its occurrence, while controversial with the public at large, is not disputed within the scientific community.
 
What do you have to gain from trying to suppress knowledge? christians today function much the same way as the Pythagoreans did 2600 years ago. That is not a compliment. They killed the guy who discovered irrational numbers, I guess numbers aren't supposed to be irrational. You know what else? You christians were wrong about the Copernican theory as well. So how did having the Sun at the center of our Solar system advance civilization in any way shape or form? I think civilization would advance a lot faster if you and your ilk didn't stand in the way of science.
 
This "Macro-Evolution" theory of yours (and other excited creationist's) does not exist.

You sure you passed that biology class?

Edit: Thank God for that Russian guy huh?
 
An entire generation of anti-malarial medication resulted from predictions made by the endosymbiotic theory, the evolutionary explanation for mitochondria and plastids.

So "macro" evolution has saved lives. What has creation "science" done?
 
An entire generation of anti-malarial medication resulted from predictions made by the endosymbiotic theory, the evolutionary explanation for mitochondria and plastids.

So "macro" evolution has saved lives. What has creation "science" done?
 
Back
Top