I can't do that anytime soon. I'm headed to a rifle match in Phoenix in the morning. It will be a while before I get back and longer before I get to the library. But, that you are reading Dawkins tells me that you are looking at one person who is singularly off the wagon so to speak. He is not a vertebrate phylogeneticist and he is trying to sell a book to the general public. So, you have to read with care. Stephen J. Gould was that way too. I loved his stuff until he hit on something I knew about first hand. And then I realized I am a sucker for a well turned phrase. Dawkins has written neat stuff, but he is far from the last word. He might also be right.
Just curious if you are headed down there to get an asswhoopin' by none other than MLV?
Well, he is not exactly asswhooping, he is currently in second or third Master (that would be 3rd or 4th overall), I am one behind at this point. Ted cleaned up in the scope class on Friday. He is tied with MLV in animal count (I think Ted shot more da dancing chickens)
Skimming through this thread since it has grown while I've been shooting is interesting, but there is a lot of mistaken ideas about what is evolution and what micro and macro evolution means.
As Real Hawkeye said, evolution is genetic change over time. That is the only definition that is recognized. Anyone that claims otherwise is simply wrong, regardless of public opinion. I can only hope that the general public of the USA is better educated than this.
the micro-macro thing is pretty odd. Most evolutionary biologists don't see micro and macro evolution as being substantially different or even a real dichotomy. Micro-macro is like small and large people. They exist but they are still people and they function in all the same ways. And there is an entire continuum between whatever you call "small" evolution and whatever you call "big" evolution. Making a big deal out of micro and macro evolution is a pretty hopeless position.
