(June 18, 2009 at 8:08 pm)Samson Wrote: One thing you need to keep in mind Senseiotho, is that that the term, "Micro/Macro" is not used in Scientific community/Circles on a normal basis....The creationist are the ones who have separated this for their own uneducated agendas, and of course the, so called, Scientist who consider themselves creationist. (And I use the term Scientist very loosely)...
Just a note to clarify about "uneducated agendas." It was the Russian Entomologist Yuri Filipchenko who coined the terms "macroevolution" and "microevolution" in 1927 in his German language work, "Variabilität und Variation." That is how it attained its modern usage. The term was later brought into the English-speaking world by the neo-darwinist Theodosius Dobzhansky in his book "Genetics and the Origin of Species" (1937). Dobzhansky actually worked with Filipchenkowas and Dobzhansky was a very influential and prolific evolutionist.
Creationists did not coin the terms or the distinction with their "uneducated agendas." It is a helpful distinction created by evolutionists between what has been verified scientifically and what is still speculation or assumption (I can give you his quote if you would like). I was using the term because I find it a helpful distinction as well, even though I know that some modern evolutionists are trying to get rid of the terms and the distinction. Though it seems like a PR campaign to gloss over the actual difficulties of macro-evolution and let its truth value ride on the evidence for micro-evolution. Webster still defines them as changes below the species level (micro) and major changes such as species formation (macro). This is how I was basically using them. But, I will try to use the terms adaptation and speciation if that is the scientific norm now, since they are basically the same. Though I don't know if speciation normally covers the emergence of new organs and body types. I guess generally speaking it would "given enough time".
"An unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates