Speciation + Evolution = More Diversity

Good topic. I have asked this question on several sites, and on multiple threads, and have never received a satisfactory answer:

What mechanism prohibits the micro-evolutionary events that everyone admits occur from adding up to a macro-evolutionary event over time?

In other words, what mechanism prevents evolution from going beyond "kinds" (which is not a scientific term, or even a defined term, but may serve here to represent the idea). What mechanism prohibits speciation, followed by speciation and still more speciation?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Archaeologist and physical anthropologist. Agreed. My point is that this is what happens, on the biological level to 1) cause speciation, and 2) cause further separation to the genus, then family level, and beyond.Creationists claim that there is some mechanism that ensures that "A dog will always be a dog." I am simply asking, "What is that mechanism?" I have yet to have anyone provide a clear and biologically convincing answer.Everyone agrees that there is change within a species. What I want to know is that mechanism halts that change at a certain point and prevents the "more diversity" that is the subject of this thread.And how do it know? How do it know?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

First, welcome to EvC.Second, you are starting off by posting nonsense.But I'll provide you with an opportunity to support what you have posted above with scientific evidence. As this is the Science Forum, that is one of our requirements--claims must be backed up with evidence.And as your claim goes against the overwhelming evidence accumulated by scientists over centuries, the least you could do would be to post the scientific basis for your claims.Thanks.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

I agree that there is no mechanism known to science to prevent lots of micro-evolutionary events from becoming macro-evolution.Yet we keep hearing from creationists that nothing can evolve beyond its own kind (which is variously defined as anything from a species to a class or phylum, whichever is most convenient at the time).Given this, it is a fair question to ask of creationists--what mechanism prevents those micros from adding up to a macro?I have asked this numerous times on different websites, and have never received a satisfactory answer.In truth, they have no idea. They just believe that kinds are immutable and that's it. When challenged they come up with some "what if" explanation, and when that is disproved they move on to another. Eventually they come back to the first "what if" and start again. But, no matter now many "what ifs" are disproved it will not shake their belief that kinds are immutable.And that's why it is called creation "science" instead of real science./rant

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

RAZD--That text figure 10 is an excellent way to display and interpret the data. It is far superior to the standard charts we see.And, for creationists, the thing to note is there is no "missing link" in that sequence, nor are there any gaps to be filled. There is a gradual transition, most likely made up of a series of micro-evolutionary events which over time added up to macro-evolution (speciation), just like we've been saying for years. And all members of the population can truly be said to be transitional between their ancestors and their descendants.This also illustrates the fallacy that creationists often challenge us with--"If that chicken suddenly gives birth to a lizard what's that poor lone lizard going to mate with?"While your figure shows evolution through time, the example of ring species gives the same example contemporaneously--with geography rather than time being the separating factor. The advantage of that form of speciation is that all transitional populations are still alive, from end to end, so that they can be studied while still living. [quote] Ring species provide unusual and valuable situations in which we can observe two species and the intermediate forms connecting them. In a ring species:

​
• A ring of populations encircles an area of unsuitable habitat.
• At one location in the ring of populations, two distinct forms coexist without interbreeding, and hence are different species.
• Around the rest of the ring, the traits of one of these species change gradually, through intermediate populations, into the traits of the second species.

A ring species, therefore, is a ring of populations in which there is only one place where two distinct species meet. Ernst Mayr called ring species "the perfect demonstration of speciation" because they show a range of intermediate forms between two species. They allow us to use variation in space to infer how changes occurred over time. This approach is especially powerful when we can reconstruct the biogeographical history of a ring species, as has been done in two cases. [b]Source [/quote]

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.