Macro-evolution Never Occured

The debate challenge of Pro proposes that macro-evolution never happened. On the other hand, Pro believes that micro-evolution happened and is still happening.Macroevolution = theory Microevolution = factThe debate challenge is deliberately an educational one. Indeed,it is neither about the origins of life nor religious in its scope.Refutations1. Observed MicroevolutionWhat Con believes to be an observed Macroevolution is actually an observed Microevolution.Let us elucidate this further, Macroevolution is basically talking about new species.This new species arise because of new genes.Now science up-to-date fails to tell us the origin of new genes in a genome.This is the reason why macroevolution is a theory and not a fact like microevolution.i.) Raphanobrassica (rabbage) is an example of microevolution and not macroevolution.It is a bigeneric hybrid by Polyploidy.Allopolyploidy results when the sets of chromosomes are derived from two or more distinct, though related species.However, the hybrid species display merely a new combination of pre-existing parental traits encoded by pre-existing genes.Reference:http://en.wikipedia.org...ii.) Scientists have observed transposons copying and splicing rapidly, which contradicts evolution's traditional scenario of slow and gradual change.Rapid transposon activity appears to be controlled by specific cellular programs and thus is not a product of mutation plus selection, nor is it part of evolution as it has been described.Reference: Kalendar, R. et al. 2000. Genome evolution of wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum) by BARE-1 retrotransposon dynamics in response to sharp microclimatic divergence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 97 (12): 6603-6607.iii.) Evolution's mutation mechanism does not explain how growth of a genome is possible. How can point mutations create new chromosomes or lengthen a strand of DNA? It is interesting to note that, in all of the selective breeding in dogs, there has been no change to the basic dog genome. All breeds of dog can still mate with one another. People have not seen any increase in dog's DNA,but have simply selected different genes from the existing dog gene pool to create the different breeds.Reference: http://science.howstuffworks.com...iv.) The worst diseases doctors treat today are caused by genetic mutations. Nearly 4,000 diseases are caused by mutations in DNA. "The human genome contains a complete set of instructions for the production of a human being…. Genome research has already exposed errors |mutations| in these instructions that lead to heart disease, cancer, and neurological degeneration."These diseases are crippling, often fatal, and many of the affected pre-born infants are aborted spontaneously, i.e., they are so badly damaged they can't even survive gestation. However, the biology textbooks, when discussing mutation in evolution, only discuss the very rare "positive" mutation, like sickle cell anemia. The fact of some 4,000 devastating genetic diseases is suppressed from publication.One top geneticist recently conducted a computer analysis to quantitate the ratio of "beneficial mutations" to harmful mutations.9 Only 186 entries for beneficial mutations were discovered (and even they have a downside), versus 453,732 entries for harmful mutations. The ratio of "beneficial mutations" to harmful mutations is 0.00041! Thus, even if a very rare mutation is "beneficial," the next 10,000 mutations in any evolutionary sequence would each be fatal or crippling, and each of the next 10,000 imaginary mutations would bring the evolution process to a halt.Reference(s):Sanford, J. 2005. Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome. Lima, NY: Elim Publishing, 26.Nora, J. et al. 1994. Medical Genetics: Principles and Practice. Philadelphia: Lea and Feliger, 3.The Human Genome Project. Announcement from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, May 6, 1993.http://scienceblogs.com...Conclusion: There is still no scientific consensus on any biological mechanism for microevolution. The reason why the debate challege speaks of an emphatic "no" in regards to the mechanism for macroevolution.2. Biochemistry A specie shares a common lineage within the microevolution level. This is best explained by epigenetics.Epigenetics is the wherein [heritable traits] genes are either on [active] or off [inactive] in expression depending on the instance of its occurence whether favorable or not [through new combinations of genes and not through new genes]. This explains natural selection by adaptation in the microevolution level.Reference(s):http://www.whatisepigenetics.com...http://discovermagazine.com...3. FossilsThe supposed transitional fossils are not "transitional" fossils at all.The reason is that all of the supposed transitional fossils are fully formed and hence, it is obviously not transitional. "All the larger groups of animals, e.g. fishes, amphibians, reptiles, mammals seem to have appeared suddenly on the earth, spreading themselves, so to speak, in an explosive manner in their various shapes and forms. Nowhere is one able to observe or prove the transition of one species into another, variation only being possible within the species themselves" Evolutionist, Max Westenhofer as quoted in Dewar's More Difficulties, p. 94 "The evidence of Geology today is that species seem to come into existence suddenly and in full perfection, remain substantially unchanged during the terms of their existence, and pass away in full perfection. Other species take their place, apparently by substitution, not by transmutation" Geologist, Joseph Le Conte "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them" Dr. David B. Kitts, Paleontologist "The known fossil record fails to document a single example of phyletic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition" Evolutionist, Dr. Steven M. Stanley It is a scientific fact in Molecular Biology that irreducible complexity is the main factor that makes us understand why the fossils showed up fully formed.Reference:http://www.evolutionnews.org...4. Molecular EvidencesThe results of the most in-depth human genome study to date, called the "ENCODE" project, revealed that 80 percent or more of the human genome appears to have some use in the set of human body tissues they investigated.1 This contrasts starkly to the evolutionary claim that "roughly 45 percent of the human genome is made up of such genetic flotsam and jetsam" or "junk DNA."Reference: The ENCODE Project Consortium. 2012. An Integrated Encyclopedia of DNA Elements in the Human Genome. Nature. 489 (7414): 57-74.The reason why both chimpanzees and men have such similar-looking transposons in similar chromosomes could be because the sequences were programmed to serve similar biological functions. Or, they could have followed similar biologically significant patterns when they were being copied and inserted, for reasons that are no longer discernible.Since transposons did not come from ancient viruses, but are instead essential parts of genomes, they can no longer be used to support the belief that chimpanzees and humans evolved from a common ancestor.Reference:Wells, J. 2000. Icons of Evolution. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc.Arguments: We have a scientific proof that the chicken precedes the egg in existence.This is clearly not macroevolution.Reference:http://www.nbcnews.com...