CHISTIANS PLEASE EXPLAIN

[Ryantology]

Micro evolution happens within a specie (wolves, horses) and that is everywhere to see - in contrast to macro evolution which supposedly creates completely new species but lacking transitional fossils and it being observed today.

I have a favorite method for correcting matters of ignorance regarding how evolution works.

Our primate ancestors didn't have one member who suddenly gave birth to a single modern homo sapiens one day. It was what you call microevolution, changes from one generation to the next are virtually imperceptible most of the time, but a million years of such changes may result in a creature at the end which has significant differences from the one at the beginning of the process.

You think of 'species' as a firm, solid qualifier which is objectively described. This is not true at all. In truth, the way we decide upon our classifications of life, and how we assign them, is quite arbitrary, especially as you go towards genus and species. Such a classification system as we use would be problematic to use in long timespans because, eventually, some modern species will evolve into very different forms in the distant future. Some won't. Point is, there won't be a single, certain point where you can say "okay, this generation is no longer Species A; it is now species B". "Species" is a term of convenience and application only in narrow timeframes.

I have a favorite analogy which I love using as a teaching tool to people who don't get evolution.



This shows how light changes in appearance from violet to red as its wavelength increases. You can think of this as violet evolving into red. This graph is 5000 pixels wide (if you click on the image, at least), with each longitudinal pixel column a slightly different color as the wavelength becomes longer, bit by tiny bit. Think of each of these pixels as generations. Each generation, the wave lengthens. It's by a tiny amount, a fraction of a nanometer, from one generation to the next.

In this example, it takes 5000 generations for violet to 'evolve' into red. In actual evolution, changes can take many times this number of generations to produce a change big enough for us to notice. It's easy for you to see different colors up there, blue, yellow, green, orange, so on. Think of those as fossils.

See, the problem is that you follow a book which implies that red cannot have 'evolved' from violet because God made the colors only 100 generations ago. So, to you, all evidence of color looks like this:
Here's how far, left to right, violet has evolved towards red in the last 100 generations:

And you insist that red can only be red and that it cannot ever have been any other color. After all, wouldn't all colors now be red? Why are there still blues and greens?

So, you invent the idea of macroevolution and microevolution and insist that they are not the same process. This leaves me asking you one question, to which I would like your honest answer: Can you point out to me precisely where on that spectrum the light stops being violet and starts being red?