Some (including the ID crowd) accept microevolution defined as observable adaptations in populations, while rejecting macroevolution defined as the never observed and very much doubtful Darwinist “common descent”. The problem is that micro and macro are just generic qualifiers that come in pairs, while evolution – the word retained – is in fact the concept in question.
Accepting microevolution creates confusion and is self defeating for those that reject Darwinist macroevolution. A better choice than microevolution is adaptation – an ancient concept (predates evolution), and an observed feature of all living organisms.
Con: Isn’t “natural selection” the name of a process that the Darwinian theory combines with “random variation” to produce a limited range of viable changes within any given baramin? Perhaps bacteria antibiotic resistance is a valid example? I think the feasibility issues have to do mainly with macroevolution, not microevolution. MA not mi. Sometimes called evolutionary adaptation? However, one could argue that epigenetics and other mechanisms are behind the biological variety within baramins.
Pro: Are mini-communism and micro-nazism good, despite their macro-versions being bad?
You can’t just recycle someone’s bad ideas and hope for the best. With “NS”, Darwin conjured into existence an imaginary process that needs no principal. But is that what you want? More importantly, is that what’s happening? Not at all! http://nonlin.org/natural-selection/.
The changes we see in bacteria antibiotic resistance, etc. need no “NS” explanation. We simply see adaptability and variations around means but no “divergence of character” whatsoever. Humans design adaptive systems all the time and never describe them as subject to “NS”. That would be ridiculous.
Now let’s take ab-resistance:
- The bacteria has no obligation to survive and often doesn’t.
- When it survives, it is thanks to this limited built-in adaptation mechanism (it will not grow wings and fly away).
- The bacteria “selects” itself or is “selected” by other organisms, so there is always an intelligent agent involved CONTRARY to the “NS” story (quote-unquote because you wouldn’t say this or that human army “selects against” the enemy).
- All organisms constantly fight antibiotic wars, so there’s nothing special about ab-resistance.
- When the war is over, ab-resistance GOES AWAY showing NO EVOLUTION. That’s why we only see ab-resistance in hospitals and other such “war zones” – thank God for no evolution, or we might all be dead by now.