The Creation Wiki is now operating on a new and improved server.
Macroevolution has never been observed (Talk.Origins)
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
- No case of macroevolution has ever been documented.
Source: Morris, Henry M., 2000 (Jan.). Strong Delusion. Back to Genesis 133: a.
Brown, Walt, 1995. In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Scientific Creation, p. 6. Response:
Creation Wiki response: (Talk Origins quotes in blue.)
|1. We would not expect to observe large changes directly. Evolution consists mainly of the accumulation of small changes over large periods of time. If we saw something like a fish turning into a frog in just a couple generations, we would have good evidence against evolution.|
It's remarkable that evolutionists do not see the faith that their worldview requires. They claim they have evidence in Speciation, which is not evidence for universal common descent in any shape or form. Then when asked for observational evidence for the theory of evolution (i.e. change beyond the kind barrier) they claim that would disprove Darwinian Evolution! It has been demonstrated, as far as the evidence goes, that minor change sometimes referred to as micro-evolution does not lead to evolution on a large scale.
|2. The evidence for evolution does not depend, even a little, on observing macroevolution directly. There is a very great deal of other evidence (Theobald 2004; see also evolution proof).|
The evidences presented in that essay are things such as vestigial structures and developmental biology which are not evidence for evolution. See True Origin for a thorough rebuttal of this essay written by Ashby Camp. Furthermore, there are some major problems with macro-evolution:
- Evidence for such an occurrence is lacking in the fossil record.
- Common structures can support a common designer thesis just as well as one of common ancestry.
- Macroevolution is implausible, proteins evolving in small increments fits the evidence, crossing the large gaps is not realistic.(Plaisted 2005)
|3. As biologists use the term, macroevolution means evolution at or above the species level. Speciation has been observed and documented.|
In creation-evolution debates, “evolution” isn’t mere ‘change in gene frequencies.’ Unless context indicates otherwise, it refers, ultimately, to naturalistic molecules-to-man transformation – anything less involves creation. “Macroevolution” makes the large-scale transformation fully explicit.
Please see Five major evolutionist misconceptions for more information.
|4. Microevolution has been observed and is taken for granted even by creationists. And because there is no known barrier to large change and because we can expect small changes to accumulate into large changes, microevolution implies macroevolution. Small changes to developmental genes or their regulation can cause relatively large changes in the adult organism (Shapiro et al. 2004).|
Micro-evolution is observed, but there are limits to the variation.
1.) An observational limit which we see all the time, dogs always produce dogs, cows always produce cows, etc.
2.) Original amount of information available: From the original starting point information is only lost and not added. Mutations occur which scramble the existing DNA and over the years certain traits are selected and passed down. As this process occurs information is lost until there can be no more variation because there is nothing to select from. This creates a natural barrier that prevents evolutionary change on a large scale.
|5. There are many transitional forms that show that macroevolution has occurred.|
Detailed series at the following link deals with this issue in depth. Transitional forms
Grassé, Evolution of Living Organisms, 1977, p. 130