At 12:14 PM -0600 3/21/02, Rod Hetzel wrote: >Paul and Paul: > >Thanks for your responses. I haven't done a whole lot of reading on this >issue but am probably as informed (or uninformed) as the average >psychologist. However, I have heard that some intelligent design >theorists make a distinction between macroevolution and microevolution. >As I understand it, macroevolution is any evolutionary change at or above >the level of species and refers to the change of one species to another >species. Microevolution is any evolutionary changes within species and >refers to changes in the frequency within a population or a species of its >alleles and their effects on the form, or phenotype, of organisms that >make up that population or species. Perhaps macroevolution could be >described as between-species evolution and microevolution as >within-species evolution. My understanding of it is that intelligent >design theorists agree that microevolution occurs, but do not believe >there is sufficient justification for macroevolution. Is this also your >understanding of the intelligent design position? How would you respond >to that position?
There are varying degrees of intelligence in the design controversy, but I believe that the main issue as presented is _not_ whether evolution has occurred, but whether natural selection (Darwin's contribution) is a sufficient mechanism to account for it. One hears more about micro/macro evolution from creationists than from evolutionary biologists. This is because 'species' is a functional category, not a structural one. That is, two species are separate because they _do_ not interbreed, not because they _can_ not. Geographic separation is enough to define separate species. Chimps and humans are usually regarded as separate species (but read Jared Diamond's _The Third Chimpanzee_) because they do not interbreed. I'm not aware that the capability of interbreeding has ever been settled (one might refer to Edgar Rice Burroughs ;-). Thus, the concept of a species is a relative and fuzzy one, and so therefore is the micro/macro evolution distinction. At any rate, the increasing fossil record is demonstrating the transitions between species quite nicely (more and more protowhales are turning up, to counter one common objection). I've even seen a fossil watch (though I'm not sure what it was watching ;-). * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University, Mankato * * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * * http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html * --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
