Examples of using Macroevolution in English and their translations into Indonesian
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Ecclesiastic
Macroevolution has never been observed.
One of the main topics in macroevolution is how new species arise.
Second is the problem in projecting“microevolution” into“macroevolution.”.
Why is macroevolution called a theory and not a fact?
The second flaw is the problem of extending“microevolution” into“macroevolution.”.
People also translate
The distinction between micro- and macroevolution is not a fundamental one- the only difference between them is of time and scale.
For biologists, there is no relevant difference between microevolution and macroevolution.
Macroevolution is a purely theoretical biological process thought to produce relatively large(macro) evolutionary change within biological organisms.
The second flaw is the problem of extending“microevolution” into“macroevolution.”.
Macroevolution, however, refers to the process of evolution that takes place on the level of species, in which one species evolves from another species.
Dr. McCarthy elaborates his astonishing hypothesis in an article on Macroevolution.
It is claimed thereis no fundamental distinction made between micro and macroevolution, with the only difference between them as one of time and scale.
Goldschmidt thought thatsmall gradual changes could not bridge the hypothetical divide between microevolution and macroevolution.
Creationists act as if there is some magic line between microevolution and macroevolution, but no such line exists as far as science is concerned.
Goldschmidt was convincedthat small gradual changes could not bridge the hypothetical divide between microevolution and macroevolution.
The claim that macroevolution is simply an extrapolation of microevolution causes the term to have two distinct meanings and to be used variably within literature.
Therefore, microevolution may occur within the dog species, but macroevolution never will.
In contrast with microevolution, macroevolution reflects large- scale changes at the species level, which result from the accumulation of numerous small changes on the microevolutionary scale.
The evidence for evolution does not depend, even a little, on observing macroevolution directly.
A second problem with the creationist use of the terms microevolution and macroevolution is the fact that the definition of what constitutes a species is not consistently defined.
Hence, it isclear that microevolution may frequently occur within same species but macroevolution never will.
The essence of what constitutes microevolution is, for creationists,different from the essence of what constitutes macroevolution.
If this were the general biogeographical pattern,it would be a strong blow to macroevolution(Brown and Lomolino 1998).
Given enough time and enough accumulated changes, natural selection can create entirely new species,known as“macroevolution.”.
Creationists are under the impression if there is some magic line between microevolution and macroevolution, but no such line exists in science.
Diversity within a species-that is, variation-they called“microevolution,” andthe hypothesis of the development of new species was termed“macroevolution.”.
Paleontology, evolutionary developmental biology, comparative genomics and genomic phylostratigraphy contribute most of the evidence for the patterns andprocesses that can be classified as macroevolution.