Strongest or most compelling evidence of Macroevolution?

Canal diggers - William Smith in particular - even before railroads. I saw his original (1815) geologic map of "England, Wales, and Portions of Scotland" in London in September. Pretty neat artwork, and apparently pretty durn accurate, from before any of the geologic eras even had names.

I'm with you crash...at what point do you say it is macro instead of micro? If there is high genetic variation but morphological variation is low is that micro or macroevolution? If the reverse case is true i.e. variation in developmental genes lead to large morphological differences without neutral loci showing such variation is it micro or macro evolution? Pan troglodytes has about 4 times the genetic variation of Homo sapiens Kaessmann H, Wiebe V, Weiss G, Paabo S.
Great ape DNA sequences reveal a reduced diversity and an expansion in humans.
Nat Genet. 2001 Feb;27(2):155-6.Are chimps therefore more macro-evolved and we are only microevolved?
I think the concept is about as useless as "kinds".

A rebuttal to that: http://trueorigins.org/theobald1a.asp
critique*
------------------
-chris[This message has been edited by messenjaH, 11-07-2003]

Would you like to pick one or two, makes threads and defend what is at that site?

I saw that a long time ago and I was pretty unimpressed (I remember one place where Camp had to misrepresent the argument he was attempting to answer). Did you read Theobald's response to the "critique"?

Nope. Know where I can find it?------------------
-chris

A response to Ashby Camp's "Critique"Theobald's answer to Camp's critique.------------------
Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

I wonder if Camp will or has responded.

Read the article I linked to.
Theobald discusses this.------------------
Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

quote:

---

I saw that a long time ago and I was pretty unimpressed (I remember one place where Camp had to misrepresent the argument he was attempting to answer).

---

Actually, I felt that Camp's responses were all misrepresentations of Theobald's points. I didn't get the impression that Camp really ever understood what Theobald was trying to say.

You have expessed a desire to learn, Messenjah. Have you worked through both the original 29, the first critique and the response? There is a fair amount of material there but, considering the size of the field, really a very tiny amount.However, though it is small it does encapsulate a lot of things to learn. One of which is, what is acknowledge to be a pretty good critique (compared to some of them ), the critique is not done nearly well enough. It seems to suffer from both not really understanding what it is critizing *and* then focussing on winning by actually getting careless with what it is saying. (Is it misrepresenting? That I will leave for the reader's eye. )If you have further questions about it I'm sure people here will try to suss it out with you. If you don't I would take your statement about willingness to learn to be, perhaps, disengenuous.

quote:

---

I'd stack up the fossil record, step back a bit and look at it.
Once this or that wasn't there, now it is! How hard is that?

---

I wouldn't call this evidence, just mere speculation.------------------
This is Prophecyexclaimed, seem to have forgotten my password...

Pardon? What part of that is speculation?

The part about the fossil record showing evolution occurred.------------------
This is Prophecyexclaimed, seem to have forgotten my password...

Iron Man /ProphecyexclaimedWhat part of the fossil record confuses you?