"micro-evolution", as employed by creationists, is a catch-all that allows them to put examples of evolution into a new category (which is simply a holding cell of expanding definition). creationists used to claim (and sometimes still do) that evolution has never been demonstrated, or that it wasn't demonstrable/falsifiable. when this idea was neutered like the rest of their arguments, they invented a "non-evolution evolution" category to put their shame.. i mean put examples of evolution into.Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
it's just a rhetorical tool. at some point, i'm sure "macro-evolution" will have to be adopted by creationists, and they'll demand that "evolutionists" must demonstrate "super-mega-macro-evolution", or some such thing.
the truth is, evolution is evolution, regardless of your baseline.
that is an interesting question, isn't it? why, for example, don't we hear about muslim fundamentalists raging against evolution? maybe they do, and we just don't hear about it. maybe they have more important things to worry about.(I'd still like to know why the Bible story of creation is the only one accepted, since there are many differing creation myths from other cultures and traditions. Why yours?)
Bookmarks