RE: [asa] (fruit flies???) A Message from the RTB Scholar Team

From: Dehler, Bernie <>
Date: Tue Apr 22 2008 - 14:13:24 EDT

I think we have a difference of definition for "macro evolution." To
the YEC, it doesn't mean large sudden changes. It means changes across
species- such as ape-like creatures to man, or land animals to whales.
Timber wolf to poodle isn't impressive- it is called "micro evolution"
and everyone agrees to those level of species changes.


If evolution were true (as I think it is), why can we get fruit flies to
evolve into something totally different like a bumble bee or even some
new creature? Not just color or sexual reproduction changes, but real
"new animal" kind of changes-even if it takes 20 generations, which
doesn't take too long with fruit flies (a couple of weeks per
generation). Is the problem still with time scale-we could do it if we
had 300 generations, but that would take 12 years of meticulous



From: Dennis Venema []
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:57 AM
To: Dehler, Bernie; AmericanScientificAffiliation Affiliation
Subject: Re: [asa] (fruit flies???) A Message from the RTB Scholar Team


Hi Bernie,

most evolutionary biologists don't think that so-called "macroevolution"
- mutations that have sudden, large-scale effects - plays much of a role
in evolution. These, while dramatic and underscoring the importance of
the affected genes in development, likely produce changes too far
outside the range of normal to provide a benefit.

in terms of artificial selection leading to rapid, large-scale
morphological changes, look no farther than the dog in your house
(descended from a timber wolf) or the various forms of wild mustard on
your plate. Anyone who doubts the ability for mutation and selection to
produce large-scale changes in a short amount of time should have a
serious look at a Chihuahua. Then consider the time scale of this
transition in terms of geology - when compared with timber wolves it
would appear instantaneously in the fossil record.

Mustard evolution under natural selection:


On 4/22/08 9:40 AM, "Dehler, Bernie" <> wrote:

Hi Keith-
 Sounds like you are referring to what YEC's call "micro evolution." I
think if we really understood evolution, we should be able to do "macro
evolution" also in the lab... such as creating new creatures; since we
can do the same thing nature does, only much faster when directed by
intelligence (we can measure, screen, and control populations of animals
that reproduce rather rapidly).


From: []
<> On Behalf Of Keith Miller
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 5:40 PM
To: AmericanScientificAffiliation Affiliation
Subject: Re: [asa] (fruit flies???) A Message from the RTB Scholar Team

Bernie wrote:

        I believe that evolution happened but here's my stumbling block.
Since nature does evolution with mutation (chance) and natural
selection, we should be able to considerably "speed things up" by
applying intelligence in a lab situation.

We do speed it up, its called artificial selection. New species have
been generated by artificial selection. The rapidity with which
artificial selection has generated the diversity of domesticated animals
and plants has demonstrated how quickly selection plus
mutation-generated genetic change can generate observable phenotypic

Again, there is no debate about the reality of speciation. Even young
Earth creationists do not deny it -- although it is often dismissed as
only variation within a completely undefined (and undefinable) "kind."



Keith B. Miller

Research Assistant Professor

Dept of Geology, Kansas State University

Manhattan, KS 66506-3201



To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 22 14:15:23 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 22 2008 - 14:15:23 EDT