Does microevolution logically include macroevolution?

This topic may have already been discussed in the past ad naseum, so if Admin. wants to reject it on the grounds of staleness, I certainly understand.I don't know a lot about TOE, so the claim I am making is very tentative. With this topic, I am here to be instructed more than to argue.But here's my idea:The system of labelling various life forms by dividing them into different species is merely a classificational scheme and is not meant to set forth the idea of essential characteristics of any given species. It is difficult to pinpoint along some evolutionary line precisely when a new species appears. I suppose in the past classification schemes were based on physical characteristics until somebody decided it made more sense to classify according to isolated gene pools. But even with this scheme, there appear to be some exceptions (dogs/wolves), which shows us that the classification scheme is merely a convenience, though perhaps the one that makes the most sense.So what happens is that the life form continues to change and after a while one group of life forms becomes insolated in terms of breeding from another group. When this isolation occurs, for whatever reason, the two groups continue to evolve separately and after a long time we can notice a difference in physical traits.The distinction between "microevolution" and "macroevolution" sounds fishy to me. Isn't all evolution "microevolution" since the changes are so gradual? It's not like there's some definite line of demarcation that is crossed where what was microevolution suddenly becomes macroevolution, is there? There are just these continuous small changes, caused by imperfect replication and mutation, and influenced by the environment, and this gradual change has to be continuous.There is no logical reason for the changes to stop within a certain circle of possible changes beyond which the life form cannot change--at least not that I can see.I conclude, therefore, that if you accept microevolution you also have to accept macroevolution.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 06-13-2005 01:38 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 06-13-2005 01:40 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 06-13-2005 01:44 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 06-14-2005 04:44 AM

Thread copied to the Does microevolution logically include macroevolution? thread in the Biological Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.