Evolution
Institution
Name
Evolution of species is less in scope than macroevolution. Macroevolution incorporates origin of species as well as fates of major differences observed in living organisms. These differences could be found in limbs, wings, bone structure, and body covering. Macroevolution links the impact environment and earth movements such continental drift alongside other earthly physical processes to evolution of species (Jablonski, 2012). Paleontology, the earth science that studies fossil organisms and related remains is said to play a vital role in macroevolution. There are evidence of fossil records stand as a proof of the large pattern in evolution and macroevolution (Jablonski, 2012). These evidences do not stand a full chance in making every person believe in macroevolution. There are those agree with the fact the current species are due to the forces of macroevolution while at the same time there are those who do not agree with the process. This essay supports the argument that macroevolution exists.
Most scientists support the process of evolutionary origin of species with respect to earth movement process such as tectonic movements and continental drift. Some scientists do not agree with the theory whatsoever. This group of scientists argues that evolution no happening now nor did it happen in the past (Morris, 2012). They argue that there is no distinct evidence that shows one organism having evolved into another organism with completely different traits. In supporting this argument, evolution and macroevolution are taken to be scientific belief. The research behind this proof of non existence of evolution include various documentations that points out that evolution did not occur at any time in the pass, is not happening in the current life and will never happen in the future (Morris, 2012). There is no person having seen it happen but what is seen are various kinds of animals and plants. These species of plants and animals have no bridgeable traits (Morris, 2012).
Other people, specifically biologists argue about the existence of evolution and go further to point out the existence of microevolution and macroevolution. There is a broad acceptance of the Darwin theory of evolution (Erwin, 2000 ). This fact has led to evolution of more other theories on evolution, macroevolution, and microevolution and all of them agree firmly with the process of natural selection as part of evolution. They talk of macroevolution to be associated with morphologic novelty. A controversy originates from an existence of discontinuity between microevolution and macroevolution with a second phase of the argument emphasizing on differences in innovativeness between species (Erwin, 2000 ). The main subject of the argument is not on whether macroevolution exist or not, but that macroevolution is a system of repeated microevolution patterns.
Looking at the current changes in the human development and various breeds or species, one would notice that evolution is still happening and subsequently has occurred in the past (Freeman, 2004). Macroevolution often occurs from the accumulation of very small changes in organisms. Some could be unnoticeable. The summation of all these changes brings about macroevolution. It is today seen with the development of the human brain and creation of better animal and plant species (Luskin, 2011). An observable phenomenon in macroevolution could be seen in evolution of automobiles. This is an evidence of the human intellectual evolution. Engineer whose brains tend to improve from one generation to another, intellectually designs the newer and better models of automobile. This is a clear evidence of macroevolution, an evolution influence a lot by environment and exposure, part of the strange theory of light and matter (Feynman, 1985).
Some bodies such as the Supreme Court of the United States do not support this innovation and evolution in the automobile industry. This US court suggests that such innovativeness comes from the combination of ideas and the addition of various designs by intelligent designers to a single basic design plan. Whatever biologist claim to be a common ancestry or evolution, the Supreme Court of the US terms it as a common evidence of a design (Luskin, 2011).
To get much about the existence of macroevolution, one has to understand about the universal common descent hypothesis. It states that all organisms, living and terrestrial, are related genealogically (Theobald, 2012). Evolution is gradual and the existing species evolved gradually through biological and reproductive process. This evolution happens on a timescale of geology and with effects from geological physical activities. There are original species commonly referred as ancestors, from which the current organisms originated (Darwin, 1872).
Most who disagree with evolution or macroevolution deny the genetic process that gradually causes changes within species and ultimately ending up generating completely new species. Genetic changes may not be noticed immediately but the morphological changes usually appear first (Theobald, 2012). Gradualness is not termed to be an evolution mechanism but posses stun constraints on macroevolution. A research on the evidence of macroevolution mechanism and the associated theories found various fundamentals to have been based on assumption although correct. Such fundamentals include developmental biology, genetics, molecular biology geology and biochemistry. They mainly do not aim to explain on adaptation of species (Rhodes, 1983).
Macroevolution is not addressed clearly by any of the many existing prediction on the process. Morphological changes such as the way fins developed into limbs and an instance of the leopard developing spots are never clearly explained in many books and researches (Grantham, 1995). The same problem comes in whenever trying to figure out the evolution of the vertebrate eye among other morphological changes believed to have been caused by macroevolution. This lack of support on such evidences brings a weakness to be used by those who argue against macroevolution. The evidence from fossils, tectonic movements and continental drifts collectively prove that evolution and macroevolution have occurred (Grantham, 1995). At the same time, the current developments in human history as well as improvement in animal and plant breeds proves that macroevolution is occurring today and its morphological changes may be observable in an undefined future.
References
Darwin, C. (1872). The Origin of Species. Sixth Edition. . New York: The Modern Library.
Erwin, D. (2000 ). Macroevolution is more than repeated rounds of microevolution. Evol Development vol 2 issue 2 , 78-84.
Feynman, R. P. (1985). QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Freeman, S. a. (2004). Evolutionary analysis 3rd edition. . Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Grantham, T. (1995). Hierarchical approaches to macroevolution: Recent work on species selection and the “effect hypothesis”. Annual Review on Ecological Systems, vol. 26 , 301-321.
Jablonski, M. J. (2012). Macroevolution in the 21st Century. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from Macroevolution : http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted_sites/paleonet/paleo21/mevolution.html
Luskin, C. (2011, May 19). Karl Giberson and Francis Collins Commit Berra’s Blunder While Arguing for Macroevolution. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from Evolution New and Views: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/05/karl_giberson_and_francis_coll046661.html
Morris, H. M. (2012). The Scientific Case Against Evolution. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from Proclaiming Scientific Truth in Creation: http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/
Rhodes, F. H. (1983). Gradualism, punctuated equilibria, and the origin of species. Nature, vol 305 , 269-272.
Theobald, D. (2012, April 16). 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution . Retrieved October 26, 2012, from The Scientific Case for Common Descent: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
