continued, page 189:
"The reason why this controversy has not been fully settled is because there seems to be an astonishing conflict between theory and observation. According to Darwinian theory, evolution is a population phenomenon and should therefore be gradual and continuous. This should be true not only for microevolution but also for macroevolution and for the transition between the two. Alas, this seems to be in conflict with observation. Wherever we look at the living biota, whether at the level of the higher taxa or even at that of the species, discontinuities are overwhelmingly frequent. Among living taxa there is no intermediacy between whales and terrestrial mammals, nor between reptiles and either birds or mammals. All 30 phyla of animals are separated from each other by a gap. There seems to be a large gap between the flowering plants (angiosperms) and their nearest relatives. The discontinuities are even more striking in the fossil record. New species usually appear in the fossil record suddenly, not connected with their ancestors by a series of intermediates. Indeed there are rather few cases of continuous series of gradually evolving species.
How can this seeming contradiction be explained?..."
Ernest Mayr then (since he is an evolutionist) discusses theories, and assuptions, to explain this problem. I respect him for acknowledging the problems in the theory of macroevolution. I don't believe in the theories he then presents, which are common in the science field today. This theory of macroevolution is far from being proven. I like the Genesis account. Just my own beliefs again.
Brien
"The reason why this controversy has not been fully settled is because there seems to be an astonishing conflict between theory and observation. According to Darwinian theory, evolution is a population phenomenon and should therefore be gradual and continuous. This should be true not only for microevolution but also for macroevolution and for the transition between the two. Alas, this seems to be in conflict with observation. Wherever we look at the living biota, whether at the level of the higher taxa or even at that of the species, discontinuities are overwhelmingly frequent. Among living taxa there is no intermediacy between whales and terrestrial mammals, nor between reptiles and either birds or mammals. All 30 phyla of animals are separated from each other by a gap. There seems to be a large gap between the flowering plants (angiosperms) and their nearest relatives. The discontinuities are even more striking in the fossil record. New species usually appear in the fossil record suddenly, not connected with their ancestors by a series of intermediates. Indeed there are rather few cases of continuous series of gradually evolving species.
How can this seeming contradiction be explained?..."
Ernest Mayr then (since he is an evolutionist) discusses theories, and assuptions, to explain this problem. I respect him for acknowledging the problems in the theory of macroevolution. I don't believe in the theories he then presents, which are common in the science field today. This theory of macroevolution is far from being proven. I like the Genesis account. Just my own beliefs again.
Brien
