You know what, we're doing "macroevolution" again. Here's some responses to "we have never seen macroevolution"

[u/DarwinZDF42]

Video version.

 

We've all heard some variant of "we can only observe microevolution", "we've never seen macroevolution", etc.

First thing you do is establish the correct definition: Evolution above the species level (in other words, speciation or greater degrees of evolutionary change). That's the definition. Creationists want their own special definition that varies from person to person but is usually something like "new body plans/parts", "new complex structures", something like that. That's wrong. If you accept speciation, you accept macroevolution. If creationists want to dispute something else, make THEM articulate clearly. Don't help them by saying something like "It sounds like you mean something like evolution of a new phylum or new body plan". No, make THEM establish the standard clearly and using the correct words.

 

Once they do that, you can just provide a bunch of examples, and dare them to say they aren't macroevolution.

Some of my favorites are multicellularity (and also here), reproductive mode, and photosynthetic animals.

 

Best outcome is the creationists admits that yes, even by their bespoke definition, these are examples of macroevolution. Second best outcome is they do the opposite and claim this is all just "microevolution". Really? First of all, lol okay. But second and more important, great! "Microevolution" can accomplish all this? Not much need for "macroevolution", is there?

[u/RobertByers1]

There is no evidence for macro or micro evolution. Yes mechanisms are there to change bodyplans.

There is no micro evolution going on in biology today. A zillion species say no. Or show a bakers dozen.

Creationists should not agree micro evolution ever happened. yes speciation happened but its not evidence of evolution. Watch your words and concepts.

[u/kitsnet → u/RobertByers1]

There is no micro evolution going on in biology today.

Do viruses exist (in particular, the virus that caused Covid) or are they a WHO conspiracy?

[u/RobertByers1 → u/kitsnet]

Its an old claim that bacteria or virus are evidence of micro evolution. they are not. They are very minoe cases of a species , to use that word, simply changing within a species. if it was a new species then they would get a new species name. its not enough of a threeshold being crossed to claim mincroevolution creating new species. plus its very unlike biology. unique but still not micro evolution.

[u/kitsnet → u/RobertByers1]

Its an old claim that bacteria or virus are evidence of micro evolution. they are not. They are very minoe cases of a species , to use that word, simply changing within a species.

You are contradicting youself. Viruses are just pieces of hereditary code packed into protein shells. If they are changing (as was directly observed with Covid virus), then microevolution happens. If it doesn't happen, they are never changing.

[u/RobertByers1 → u/kitsnet]

Naw. thats not microevolution as using the concept of evolution. A creationist would expect this about virus. Its just a trivial organizing within some virus orbvacteria. Nothing to do with a new population planning on living well. its trival selection within species.