Ashwin on Common Descent


(George) #101

@JoeG… that would certainly be a big surprise to @Ashwin_s!

I think you wanted to say that Creationists accept “micro-evolution” … but mostly NOT macro-evolution which refers to Speciation!

There has been more buzz in recent years about some animals coming off the Ark “speciatimg” to occupy all the empty living spaces.

But I don’t think @Ashwin_s would agree that most creationist support speciation in general


(Intelligent Design Deist) #102

All of the Creation orgs accept speciation. And that buzz started decades ago


(George) #103

@Ashwin_s,

If you want to help make a difference ask @JoeG what on earth he means?

Are the disputes over evolution finally over… and nobody told us?


(Blogging Graduate Student) #104

Speciation is macroevolution by definition. I know what you’re getting at is that speciation isn’t “major transition”, but you should say that instead of muddying the definition of macroevolution. The term is used to describe something specific in evolutionary biology - evolution at or above the species level.


(Intelligent Design Deist) #105

No, macroevolution is the claim of new body plans. From Jerry Coyne:

“MACROEVOLUTION: ‘Major’ evolutionary change , usually thought of as large changes in body form or the evolution of one type of plant or animal from another type. The change from our primate ancestor to modern humans, or from early reptiles to birds, would be considered macroevolution.

“MICROEVOLUTION: ‘Minor’ evolutionary change, such as the change in size or color of a species. One example is the evolution of different skin colors or hair types among human populations; another is the evolution of antibiotic resistance in bacteria.”


(Intelligent Design Deist) #106

Why don’t you just learn what is being debated? Speciation does NOT require new body plans. The voles are all still voles. The finches are all still finches.


(Ashwin S) #107

I know that YECs believe in special creation of kinds… and some ammount if speciation within.


(Blogging Graduate Student) #108

Macroevolution would include the evolution of new body plans, but that doesn’t that all evolution that doesn’t involve new body plans isn’t macroevolution. All thumbs are fingers, not all fingers are thumbs.


(George) #109

@Ashwin_s,

This barely suffices as YOU replicate.

But @JoeG isn’t even trying to be consistent or coherent.

Now he is insisting mico-evolution IS speciation… where for 50 years it has been EXPLICITLY INVOKED on cases where adaptation (AND NOT SPECIATION OF ANY KIND) was the topic!


(George) #110

If this is a duplicate, my apologies… an earlier response vanished from my screen.

@ashwin_s,

Even your attempts to replicate Joe’s position creaks like an old wagon.

@JoeG isn’t even trying to be coherent.

For 50 years we have used the term micro-evolution (happily or grudgingly) to EXPLICITLY evoke population changes involving adaptation, rather than speciation.

And now Joe wants to use the term to mean even ADAPTATION is Speciation?

I’m a nice guy and all… but I would slap full moderation on anyone who arrives here just to throw grenades in all the rooms!

(@swamidass and @Revealed_Cosmology, please take note.)


(Ashwin S) #111

George,
I know the YEC position because I try to understand what people are trying to say.
I would recommend such an approach to you also.
Right now, you seem to be ranting … I have no idea what point you want to make in the last 20 or so posts to me. Hence I have been ignoring you in order to avoid wasting time/space. If you continue in this vain… I will not respond. No offence meant.
Peace.


(Intelligent Design Deist) #112

@Ashwin_s Exactly- they call it “variation within the kind”.

Answers in Genesis on speciation

ICR and life after the Ark

Evolution is not being debated. ID is not anti-evolution


(Intelligent Design Deist) #113

That is only because you don’t know what you are talking about. Microevolution includes speciation. The voles are all microevolution. The different finches are all microevolution.


(Intelligent Design Deist) #114

Who is “we”? Please provide a reference for your claim.


(Blogging Graduate Student) #115

I corrected my last comment. The phrase should have been:

Macroevolution would include the evolution of new body plans, but that doesn’t that all evolution that doesn’t involve new body plans isn’t macroevolution.


(Intelligent Design Deist) #116

Examples please. How can one tell if it is macroevolution rather than micro?

Macroevolution

Macroevolution encompasses the grandest trends and transformations in evolution, such as the origin of mammals and the radiation of flowering plants.


(Blogging Graduate Student) #117

If it involves speciation, or events “above” this level like major transitions in morphology and body plans, then it’s macroevolution. By definition. Words have meanings.


(Intelligent Design Deist) #118

@evograd [quote=“evograd, post:117, topic:984”]
If it involves speciation,[/quote]

That doesn’t follow any definition I know of. I have provided references to support my claim. You are going to have to do more than your say-so


(Ashwin S) #119

Hi
Joe, when we read scientific literature, a common understanding of macro evolution is evolution from species level and beyond.
YECs generally use macro evolution as happening above the level of “kinds” (each kind conssisting is one or more close species).
@evograd: I am sure you understood what @JoeG is referring to as macro evolution. If you would prefer some other terminology… you can suggest the same.


(Blogging Graduate Student) #120

I do, that’s why I offered a solution in my first reply to him:

Speciation is macroevolution by definition. I know what you’re getting at is that speciation isn’t “major transition”, but you should say that instead of muddying the definition of macroevolution. The term is used to describe something specific in evolutionary biology - evolution at or above the species level.