Joined: April 2006
|Quote (Ftk @ June 24 2007,11:55)|
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ June 24 2007,11:20)|
|FTK, simple question. Do you agree with|
|If evolution happened, one would expect to see gradual transitions among many living things. For example, variations of dogs might blend in with variations of cats.|
Would you mind posting the link to that quote? I believe what he's saying is that if macroevolution has occurred, we might see some of these transitions still slowly occuring over time. We never witness macro changes - can't even make them happen.
The cat/dog is an "example".
If you've read all Brown's work, it's obvious that he knows enough about biology to realize that a cat and a dog cannot breed and create a cat/dog "blend", if that is what you are implying.
He's trying to give an "example" of how things would have occured and what we should still be seeing if macroev. was "factual".
It's the first line here:
The problem is that it's not true. The statement of evolutionary theory is that cats and dogs (and every other critter) have a common ancestor. That critter will not have been "half dog/half cat".
Define "macro change". How is a "macro change" different from a great many "micro-changes" one after the other?