MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it?

That is preceded by the creation of new varieties by mutation. You never run out of genetic variation because there are mutations in every individual in every generation.

There is no purpose in selection. It is not a teleological process. There could also be mutations that occur in black peppered moths that result in white moths. The principle is also that new varieties occur as new mutations occur.

If it isn't teleological, then new mutations don't "defeat the purpose of selection". Selection is simply what happens. You might as well say that water evaporating in the oceans defeats the purpose of rivers flowing water to the oceans. There are still black and white peppered moths. The end result of mutation is gains. You can still have the old varieties survive in other populations, and then have those two populations diverge from one another over time. This is called speciation.

The formation of new phenotypes only requires mutations. Selection for an already existing phenotype is not the formation of new phenotypes. Over time, new mutations will occur and accumulate in those breeds which increases genetic diversity. As long as the population increases or stays the same you will always get an increase in genetic diversity due to the accumulation of new mutations. That is why species who have not gone through a recent bottleneck have more genetic diversity than species who have gone through a recent genetic bottleneck. You need to acknowledge the basic principle that every individual in every generation is born with mutations which increase genetic diversity.

Genetic diversity increases due to the accumulation of mutations. If you are selecting for just one allele at one gene locus there are still tens of thousands of other genes that are mutating. Yes, you did. You claimed that one allele must replace the other allele. That is your whole spiel.stage 1: all white moths
stage 2: 1 black moth and the rest are white moths
stage 3: 50% black moths and 50% white mothsIs stage 3 an increase in genetic diversity over stage 1? Yes or no?

It is also illustrated by the pocket mice and peppered moths we have discussed previously. In both cases you start with just one color. Over time, you get a mixed population of two colors. How is that not an increase in genetic diversity? False. Those new phenotypes are brought about by mutations in the parent population. New phenotypes will continue to appear in the daughter populations since mutations never stop. If one allele for one gene is selected for this does not stop the process of mutation. It continues in every generation. It is the accumulation of these mutations over time that results in macroevolution. You won't recognize the increase in genetic diversity produced by new mutations. We already recognize that mutations in the human lineage have replaced alleles that existed in the common ancestor of humans and chimps. You won't recognize that this is an ongoing process and that it never stops due to the fact that mutations continue to appear and continue to be selected for. This is how we get two co-existing species with different genomes, otherwise known as macroevolution. You HAVE TO have mutations to select for, and those mutations increase genetic diversity. You HAVE TO have an accumulation of those mutations over time because there is no mechanism that will prevent it.

You also gained genetic stuff to get the new color. That's the point.Also, the difference in color comes from one gene. There are tens of thousands of other genes in the moth genome. You can't say that overall genetic diversity was lost because of one gene out of tens of thousands. What you are talking about is macroevolution. This is where alleles in the parent population are replaced by new mutations, resulting in a modified daughter population. This is why the human and chimp genomes are different from each other, and will continue to diverge over time due to the continual accumulation of new genetic diversity. And new mutations will continue to occur and increase genetic diversity. You keep ignoring that fact. You are trying to claim that once selection occurs for a single allele that everything just stops. It doesn't. Mutations continue to appear, and selection will continue to operate as genetic diversity increases. You have continually stated that genetic diversity can only decrease. New mutations do change the pattern you are describing. Precisely, just as our common ancestor with chimps was a primate, and we are still primates. Our common ancestor with bears was a mammal, and we are still mammals. Our common ancestor with fish was a vertebrate, and we are still vertebrates.I think you are finally understanding what macroevolution is. You have already agreed that mutations provide new genetic diversity, so there is no running out of genetic material. First, I have evidence that humans and chimps evolved from a common ancestor, so no faith is needed.Second, I am not saying that humans evolved from chimps. I am saying that both species evolved from a common primate ancestor, and we are both still primates. The differences between our genomes are due to the very mechanisms that you have already agreed to, mutations followed by selection. New mutations replenish genetic diversity.

You are gaining genetic diversity because of mutations. I don't have to pick between your false choices.

That's like saying you can't walk by moving your legs back and forth.New mutations produce new phenotypes. New phenotypes are selected for. New mutations produce new phenotypes. New phenotypes are selected for. New mutations produce new phenotypes. New phenotypes are selected for.IT NEVER STOPS. IT KEEPS GOING.

Mutations are a part of macroevolution and they add genetic diversity. Adding genetic diversity through mutations does not halt evolution.

Mutations add genetic diversity, and they occur in every individual in every generation. It never stops. You get increasing heterozygosity as that initial mutation is selected for. You also get increasing heterozygosity in other genes as they accumulate mutations. Over time, genetic diversity will increase in both elephant seals and cheetahs as mutations accumulate. There is also no doubt that they will become more genetically diverse after the genetic bottleneck, as every single study has shown. They are also different from other species that they share a common ancestor with because of the accumulation of mutations in each lineage.

Selection for an allele does not stop mutations from happening. It never stops. If you select for one allele of one gene then there are still tens of thousands of other genes that are mutating, and new phenotypes will be selected for.

New mutations in those same genes will change the head and jaw, and they can be selected for. Once those new phenotypes are selected for and become dominant in the population, new mutations occur in those same genes for the head and jaw and can be selected for. This repeats over and over and over and over. Mutations continue to change genes, even after they have been selected for.

Evolution is the repeated process of adding genetic diversity and then selecting for that added genetic diversity. it never stops unless the lineage goes extinct. It never hits a dead end because new phenotypes and new genetic diversity is continually produced so that there are new things to select for. You can also have new mutations that are forming new species, such as the differences between the chimp and human genomes that is responsible for the physical differences between those two species. Mutations do occur in sex cells, and I can site multiple papers demonstrating that each human is born with 50-100 new mutations that occurred in the sex cells of their parents. Those mutations will be passed on.If you think I am exaggerating beneficial mutations, then you need to a scientific reference demonstrating that fact.

Then reference "general knowledge" and show that this is true. Assertions don't cut it.Also, simple math shows that you are wrong. If there is a possible beneficial mutation in a gene then it doesn't take that many humans to get that beneficial mutations. The diploid human genome is 6 billion bases, and the human mutation rate is about 100 mutations per person per generation. If there are 3 possible base changes at every locus, that is 18 billion possible mutations. 18 billion divided by 100 is 180 million. You only need 180 million births to get that one beneficial mutation. But that isn't what we observe happening. We observe that new mutations produce new phenotypes which are then selected for. Your claim is contradicted by observations.