man-man Posted:

The distinction between macro and micro evolution is a false one; the only difference is the application of time.

man-man, I agree with most everything that you have said in this thread until now. However, macroevolution and microevolution are not identical, in that macroevolution, by all indications, moves in spurts while microevolution (adaptation) is a more consistent process of refinement. An oversimplified analogy: growth in humans from conception to adulthood is a fairly consistent process, with the exceptions of two major spurts (natal cellular differentiation and puberty) where the changes are dramatic in comparison. To state that growth is a singularly linear process would be discounting the abruptness of those two periods of change; likewise, stating that all evolution looks like microevolution discounts fossil record evidence that shows that many creatures stayed (mostly) static for tens of millions of years and then made (relatively) rapid transitions/divergences/etc.

That being said, I still think the biggest problem in this thread is confusion regarding the scientific use of the words “hypothesis”, “theory” and “law”. I’d say a full half of the disagreements could be resolved by agreeing on language.

Edit: grammar fail.