Hello gang, In this post I will define the difference between Microevolution vs. Macroevolution. Yes, I believe evolution happens, I believe Microevolution happens, not Macroevolution.
First, micro vs macro has nothing to do with the amount or number of changes. That is, numerous micro evolutions does not equate to a macro evolution. The main difference is the source of the changes. Microevolution or Adaptation is a process whereby an individual expresses certain traits that enable it to adapt more successfully to its new environment. The source of the changes is the information already encoded in its DNA. Upon the appearance of an environmental stress, certain genes could express itself resulting in a new macro trait that would enable it to adapt to its new environment. The information needed to create a new trait is already fully encoded in its DNA. Only the activation is done. This form of evolution is called Microevolution. The species evolve within its own DNA boundaries and changes occur within the species itself. Since microevolution is simply an activation of a dormat trait, the new trait created is not permanent. It is possible for the new trait to dissappear and lay dormant again once the stress is removed. And since changes are encoded in the DNA, microevolutionary changes are not additive. That is it does not persist within a species with new additions to it. It is all just an expression of what that species is inherently capable of based on the makeup of its DNA genes. Macroevolution or Darwinian Evolution on the other hand, is this idea that changes are the result of random mutation on one's DNA. Dormant traits are not expressed, rather new genes randomly come into being to create a new trait. And because huge changes to DNA are fatal, macroevolutionary change has to occur in small minute and small incremental changes occuring over generations. Otherwise, a major retructuring on one's DNA would cause massive genetic deformations causing less ability to compete and survive. Macroevolution is this idea that changes have to be mutated into place and that numerous successive changes would result in the creation of a new species. This is in essence what Darwinian Evolution postulates. To illustrate, there was a study a few decades back wherein microbiologists subjected E. coli to streptomycin antibiotics. As expected, the some E. Coli survived streptomycin, and reproduced and eventually became streptomycin resistant. Hurray, positive proof that Darwinian Evolution occurs!!!, right? Hold on a second. This is NOT proof of Darwinian Evolution but rather this is proof of microevolution is action. Upon closer examination of the resistant E.Coli colonies, they found out the streptomycin resistance was conferred by a single protein on the cell wall. The new protein prevented streptomycin from latching onto the cell wall thus preventing it from denaturing the cell wall and breaking it open. And upon even closer examination, they found out the this new protein was a result of an expression of a single gene that normally lay dormant in the E.Coli. Hence, it became clear the the ability of E. Coli to develop streptomycin resistance was conferred by "genetic coding" already existing within its DNA. All that was required was for that gene to be expressed. No random mutation of DNA occured. No natural selection, just an expression of what God already gave it. Furthermore, E.Coli did not eventually evolve into a different species. It is still E.Coli after the equivalent of Billions of years of evolution. Furthermore, the streptomycin resistance dissappeared from the general population after streptomycin was removed for a couple of generations. The genes once again laid dormant and the general population was once again susceptible to streptomycin. This my friends is why there is so much confusion in the debate, because these scientists are so dishonest, so blinded by religious adherence to Darwinian Dogma that they deliberately lie about these things. I bet none of you in this forum heard about this. All you heard was that the bacteria developed streptomycin resistance providing irrefutable proof of Darwinian Evolution, right? None of you heard the other details that would question Darwinian Dogma, right? Jojo
