Is there microevolution?
Question:
I want to make clear that I believe that God created everything according to Romans 1:20. I was with friends and the topic of a movie called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed came up. I mentioned that someone I knew said "You Creationists don't believe in evolution, but we evolutionists believe in God." Our evangelist said there is a difference between microevolution and macroevolution. One is that we came from some primordial goo. The other is God created us, but we are constantly changing. I find this idea hard to swallow. As I said before in the beginning, God created everything and that's where I see it stopping. Am I wrong?
Answer:
Evolution has become so popular and so dogmatically preached that people have been searching for ways to blend the concepts of Christianity and evolution. The idea of microevolution and macroevolution is one of those shifts that attempt to find some common ground.
One definition that I found said:
Macroevolution major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa. [Dictionary.com]
Microevolution 1. evolutionary change involving the gradual accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties within a species. 2. minor evolutionary change observed over a short period of time. [Dictionary.com]
In other words, the two terms still refer to change, but macroevolution involves large-scale changes, such as the emergence of a new species. Microevolution is small changes that don't change the species, but according to evolution, they accumulate over time to cause macroevolutionary changes.
Essentially, "microevolution" has largely replaced the older view of variation. Variation is the idea that every living creature can adapt to its environment within a certain range. Certain features become predominant in one environment, while others predominate in another. For example, in hot, sunny climates, humans tend to have darker skin colors, while in colder, cloudier climates, humans tend to have lighter skin colors. Humans come in a variety of skin tones, but certain skin tones are better suited for specific climates. Yet, the Eskimos in northern Alaska are just as much human as the Africans in the middle of the Congo.
But with microevolution, the limits of change are declared to be non-existent. What is claimed is that because variation in a species exists, it, therefore, proves that changes do occur and can accumulate into large changes. It is the latter point that is the leap of faith. There is no evidence of the accumulation of small changes to large changes. What we see is variation within a range and kinds remaining the same, but that variation doesn't lead to the conclusion that transitions occur to new species. Change the environment and you'll see the adaptation swing back in the other direction.
I prefer not to use the terms "macroevolution" and "microevolution" because they are shallow attempts to get people to accept the general concept of evolution by using the word frequently. You can see this because evolution tends to be "sold" by getting a person to agree that microevolution exists and then saying that macroevolution is just an extension of microevolution. Textbooks supporting evolution typically state that there is no difference between microevolution and macroevolution except for the scale of changes. I continue to use the terms "variation" and "adaptation" instead.
"Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good" (Genesis 1:24-25).
