I often see the argument that microevolution is real, but macroevolution is not real. What people don’t understand is that these two things are not two separate processes, they’re the same process. If one is real, both are real. Macroevolution isn’t some completely different mystery process where a dog gives birth to a cat suddenly.
Microevolution is small, instantaneous changes in genetics. A gene mutates and dog may be born slightly smaller, or with a different ear shape. It’s pretty straight forward and even the most ardent anti-evolutionists today have to accept that yes, it does happen. But just a few short years ago anti-evolutionists didn’t even accept (or understand) that this was evolution. Today the understanding among the general public is so great that it cannot be denied even by those who were denying it not all that long ago.
Macroevolution is not a different process. It’s not a process at all. Macroevolution is just the sum of all of those tiny changes over long periods of time. Macroevolution is not some other thing happening. It’s nothing more than simple addition. It’s the math you do to sum up all the different micro-changes made over a period of time. That’s it. It’s microevolution done millions, even trillions of times.
It was not that long ago that anti-evolutionists were arguing that the whole thing was made up. Now they say that the thing’s “kind” can’t change. A dog may be smaller or bigger, have a shorter or longer shout, etc., but it’s still a dog. How do you know it’s a “dog”? Is a wolf a dog? Let’s try a little harder question. Is a lion a cat? Does it look like Mittens to you? Are “lion” and “cat” 2 different “kinds”? What about a bobcat? That certainly looks a bit like Mittens. Is that a different “kind”? If they can breed and produce offspring are they the same “kind”? If they look very similar but cannot breed are they different “kinds” or the same? What about plant “kinds”? If I were to ask what “kind” broccoli was, or cauliflower, or kale, or a head of cabbage, would they all be the same “kind”? Would they be the same “kind” as the wild mustard plant? Because a few thousand years ago they all were the wild mustard plant, changed significantly through selective breeding over thousands of years, some over just a few hundred years. This is a matter of historical record, not an evolutionary conspiracy. These questions actually can’t be answered because the word “kind” is taken from the Bible, which is about as useful as a scientific reference as razor wire is as toilet paper.
And therein lies the problem. These beliefs live in the shadows of ignorance and desire. The desire to believe in a fantastical after-death meet up with all your dead loved ones is pretty powerful. And this makes the anti-evolutionist all too willing to wallow in ignorance. They don’t want to know the truth. They want their beliefs to be confirmed. And there are many out there who are eager to purposely spread lies and disinformation. Most anti-evolutionists don’t realize that macroevolution is not a separate thing. Most don’t even understand what evolution is, or even have a very basic idea of how science works. They throw around terms like, “It’s just a theory!” unironically, completely unaware that if you were to translate that sentence to say the exact same thing, except without referencing science, the closest translation, in complete laymen’s terms, would be “It’s just a fact!” Scientific “theory” is roughly the equivalent of laymen’s “fact” except scientists are more willing to accept that they may be wrong than laymen generally are.