Difference between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution

Demonstrating the relationship between micro-evolution, which most people can't deny, and macro-evolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB902.html

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• evolution
• creationism
• demonstration
• micro
• macro
• agnosticism
• atheism
• christianity

[parasitesarefunny]

Macro Evolution is NOT Scientific and cannot even pass the Scientific Method that DEMANDS a theory be duplicatable and predictable. ROFLMAO! Yet idiots fall for this crapola? Truly amazing!

[proudfootz]

@parasitesarefunny

So in your opinion no science can be done regarding events in the past because history isn't 'repeatable'?

Certainly the DNA evidence indicating evolution is reproduced in the laboratory all the time - and evolution does make predictions which are constantly being confirmed with new archeological discoveries and chemical analyses.

What's truly amazing is that you deride science on the interwebs which itself is based on scientific discoveries.

[parasitesarefunny]

@proudfootz

You dont even know the difference between SCIENCE & HISTORY. ROFLMAO! Let alone what the Scientific Method entails.

There is ZERO DNA evidence that proves or supports evolution my dear fool and never has Macro Evolution been proven through archeology. That is just too funny!

You take a FAITH BASED BELIEF called Macro Evolution and attempt to call it Science! LMAO! What an idiot.

ALL REAL SCIENCE DEMANDS THAT A GIVEN THEORY CAN BE PREDICTED & DUPLICATED BY ANYONE. YOU FAIL.

[proudfootz]

@parasitesarefunny

The evolution of species from common ancestors is a historic process studied by science.

It is well supported by DNA evidence indicating relationships between species.

All the CAPS LOCK in the world won't make science go away. Too bad for you.

[wuntbedruv]

I don't believe in micro evolution. I don't believe in miles, tons gallons, any thing that has the prefix kilo, giga terra etc. It makes sence to me

[proudfootz]

@wuntbedruv

Good for you!

[orlandofriend]

macro evolution experiments always fail. fact.

[Mrxb0x]

@parasitesarefunny Macro evolution is in fact, observable in a lab, it has been documented and PROVEN.

Suck on that.

[Mikeybetts]

@proudfootz

differnece between micro evolution and macro evolution

time... that is all

[kyekire]

@parasitesarefunny you claim evolution hasn't been duplicated, in the past ten years it's been duplicated tens of thousands of times you're the idiot.

[kyekire]

There's no difference, the terms micro evo and macro evo were invented by creationists, there is no actual distinction. There is no such biological term as "kind", creationists made it up too. Really they are based on the same concept, if microevo is true then so is marcoevo.

[KapStuf]

The creationist method:

Introduce a distinction - between microevolution and macroevolution.

Describe the difference with a third new term - kind.

Don't define it. Use it to mean whatever's convenient at the time.

Pretend you've proven something.

[parasitesarefunny]

@proudfootz

To bad your "theory" FAILS the basic Scientific Method of simple Duplication and Prediction required of any "SCIENTIFIC" theory. It's the underlying foundation of what makes science, science.

You cannot duplicate or predict your UN-scientific theory and you call it science? roflmao! Just another brainwashed idiot who repeats what ever it is told to repeat.