In order for all life on earth to Evolve from a single micro-organism, that life has to go through the two types of evolution. Micro and Macro. In a previous post, those people discussing were not able to come to an agreed definition of the difference between the two. I would like to propose a definition based off of simple understanding of Genetics.
Micro-evolution:
Micro evolution is changing of allele frequency within or between populations of the same "species", but not divergence into different "species" because even if two types of populations emerge from one population many times they can merge back into one population. If they can merge than they are not separate species. This is genetic drift and adaptation by natural selection.
Macro-evolution:
In order for one organism to evolve into a two types of organisms, they have to be separated into two populations and then have enough mutations (that do not hurt or kill the organism and actually change the physiology of the organism) to completely change the organism into two distinguishable types ("kinds") that cannot re-mix their genetic information. They then become two separate "species" That is macro-evolution.
I want to strictly impose that these two populations CANNOT remix when they diverge. Not just that they typically don't remix just because they don't feel like it or they are too far away, but they cannot physically, and or genetically remix.
Evolution of all life on earth requires more than just a changing of genetic information but an increase in genetic information between two types of animals. For example, the average species of bacteria have anywhere between 600,000 base pairs of DNA and 7 million base pairs. The average human has about "3164.7 million chemical nucleotide bases"
Human Genome Project Information Site Has Been Updated
So if all life started as a single bacteria, that bacteria would have to have increased in genetic information as it evolved into different organisms such as a fish or something and then into salamander then lizard or something, all the way up to a human. (I don't know the entire transition)
Mutations would have to occur which code for new enzymes or proteins that perform new, useful and beneficial functions. This would mean that the new mutation would have to insert a huge amount of new base pairs into the genetic code all at once or one base pair at a time over a long time (but those new genes don't get deleted or changed back for some reason).
Macro evolution with mutations that increase new, useful and/or beneficial genetic information that makes the organism more complex have to both be possible, have happened in the past and happen today in order for all life on earth to have evolved from a single micro-organism.
Does everyone agree with these definitions?
What evidence is there for Macro-evolution?
Is there any proved, recorded event of mutations that increased beneficial or useful genetic information?
Edited by jbozz21, : suggestions of Admin