from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. Evolution resulting from a succession of relatively small genetic variations that often cause the formation of new subspecies.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. small-scale changes in the history of life, such as changes in allele frequencies in a population (over a few generations); also known as change at or below the species level.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- n. evolution resulting from small specific genetic changes that can lead to a new subspecies
ID proponents did not invent the term microevolution, my friends.
The so-called proofs of evolution all refer to microevolution, that is to say, variation within an existing group of plants or animals.
Digressing, I am not aware of * any* ID folks who disbelieve in microevolution, such as that which produced dogs.
The terms microevolution and macroevolution are so frequently used in the context of creationism, Intelligent Design, and evolution, so I thought it might be a good idea to move the topic to a new thread.
I thought that most ID adherents would accept the idea of microevolution, which is what this sort of optimization problem is similar to.
So when we hear the term “fact of evolution,” it is important to recognize that this refers to microevolution only.
If one believes that dogs came from a single ancestor, then one believes in microevolution.
There is a mountain of evidence for such small changes, called microevolution -- the evolution of drug resistance, for instance, is just one of many documented examples.
1 You believe in so-called "microevolution" - adaptive variations within a species.
(which is known as microevolution), while the evolution of new species (known as macroevolution) is not.
Wordnik is becoming a not-for-profit! Read our announcement here.