>Epilogue: To avoid the inevitable question regarding mechanisms, I need to
>point out that evolution as a whole does involve a number of different
>mechanisms that operate at different stages of evolutionary development.
>These mechanisms, however, are not mutually exclusive and they do not
>operate independently. As such, a ("macro") mechanism that may utilize
>changes in the genes that control development would still have to work
>cooperatively with the ("micro") mechanisms of gene duplication, mutation
>and natural selection to create a new viable organism, otherwise it would
>fail to survive and propogate itself.
Macroevolutionary changes have a cellular and a DNA aspect, and they're subject
to mutation and natural selection. But they're still macroevolutionary changes.
One doesn't have to delineate mechanisms to argue for macroevolution. Just
pointing out the geological instantaneousness of the Cambrian explosion, in
to the observable modes and rates of evolution, makes a strong case.
tend to be smug in the claim that microevolution explains it all. Creationists
science a service when they make challenges based on this valid point.
Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ firstname.lastname@example.org