If you don't understand that "micro" and "macro" evolution are the completely different, you've no business engaging in a discussion of evolution.
This statement begins with a false predicate and ends with a conclusion based on that falsehood.
Originally Posted by Fubarski
Micro evolution is the e.coli examples you've cited, with variations developing within a species in response to environment or random chance.
But the species remains e. coli, no matter how long it's been in existence.
This statement is also false.
Originally Posted by Fubarski
Macro evolution is the development of a new species through changes to an earlier species, an alleged example bein ape to man.
A conclusion base on false statements.
The question that arises in the face of the above is this: Do you make the false statements to decieve or do you make them out of ignorance?
E. coli is a single cell organism and as such it cannot even be considered for "macro evolution" as you postulate. E. Coli will always reproduce by cell division and not by sexual reproduction. E. Coli that is different genetically from previous E. Coli must lose the gene distinction(s) acquired by whatever means before it can revert to being the same E. coli it was before the change. It is by definition evolved, whether it expresses the acquired genetic differences or not. Species difference definition that demands only that two different species be unable to reproduce sexually is a false predicate. Bacteria commonly evolve by sharing genes and plasmids with other oft times wholly unrelated species evolve no matter how many false assumptions you base incorrect conclusions upon. Viruses do the same thing, and they are basically DNA inside a protein shell and do not fit much of what we would define as life. Unequivocally however viruses do change and do so in a manner which mimics at the least evolution.
Micro vs macro evolution is a false dichotomy as demonstrated above and can only have one of two bases, deception by intent or ignorance. In either case, there is no point in engaging in discussion with a person engaged in that activity until and unless said person admits one or the other basis.
