No. Because mutation is part of microevolution. We need measurements of rates before we can come to that conclusion
So you guys, meaning the entire evo community, have asserted for decades now that beneficial mutational rates are sufficient to overcome the natural decrease in genetic variety through observed microevolutionary processes, but YOU HAVE NEVER TAKEN ANY MEASUREMENTS TO VERIFY THIS CLAIM!!!
Unbelievable!
And yet you claim this is an empirical-based approach. How can you claim random mutations and natural selection can account for macroevolution without measuring this? Is it more like a faith thing with you guys?
™ Version 4.2
