what the universe is macro-evolution?
970561
Macroevolution refers to evolution that occurs above the level of species, over long periods of time, that leads to speciation, in contrast to microevolution, which refers to smaller evolutionary changes (described as changes in allele frequencies) within a species or population. Within the Modern Synthesis school, microevolution is thought to be the only mode of evolution. The process of speciation (in isolated populations) can fall within the purview of either. Paleontology, evolutionary developmental biology, and comparative genomics contribute most of the evidence for the patterns and processes that can be classified as macroevolution.\n\nMacroevolution is controversial in two ways:\n\nIt is disputed among biologists whether there are macroevolutionary processes that are not described by strictly gradual phenotypic change, of the type studied by classical population genetics. One of these two views is becoming less and less tenable as the role for genome-wide changes and developmental processes in evolution become clearer. \nA misunderstanding about this biological controversy has allowed the concept of macroevolution to be coopted by creationists. They use this controversy as a supposed "hole" in the evidence for deep-time evolution.
766879
Evolution and the big-bang. Can't beat them
230650
I think the Big Bang is actually another universe budding off. There were mulitple Universes (Parralel Universe Theory) before the big Bang. Yet, what do u define as a universe? If it is a "world" of intelligent being maybe not (who knows). So the answer is yes and no depending on ur definiton of a universe.
18930
There have been alternative theories throughout history.  I believe most astronomers now accept the Big Bang theory as best fitting the known facts. Your question about a multiplicity of Big Bangfs is a good one: perhaps the biggest cosmological debate about the nature of the universe is whether the universe will expand forever, or whether it will ultimately contract again into a state similar to just prior to the Big Bang.  Of those who think it will contract, many believe that it then will repeat a Big Bang process, so that the universe will proceed on a Bang, expansion, contraction, Bang  . . . pattern forever.\n\nI've included a link to one website that provides answers to basic astronomical questions, in a range from beginning to more advanced.
997052
The theory evolved based on the facts that have been observed in the universe. The theory may not be correct or accurate but it does fit the facts and it is the only explanation anyone has been able to give to fit the facts.  \n\nIf you have a better one let's hear it.
716247
That is called theistic evolution.
872
The universe is so huge that it would be a common sense thing to belive that life exists else where. But it would be a question how that animals might have formed?. How will they differ from us? How will they reproduce or reproduce in first place? or will they ever die? will their genetic code read lines of death or aging?
948721
Evolution is the best explanation we have for how species develop. It is supported by a mountain of evidence and is logical to support until new information modifies or discredits it. Unlike God Theory, which is inviolate, set in stone and supported by nothing more than superstition and delusion, Evolution is fluid and developing.
1106252
speaking in all logic terms all religon aside.  The universe always was it and it always will be here in one way or another.  But before the "big bang" the universe was smaller, much smaller infact than it was before this catastrophic event.  After the big bang everything that was once very very dense and all close together, is now moving apart from eachother at a considerable rate, leaving more and more area of what we call "space".
897391
I think that any rational, reasonable individual when presented with the weight of our current knowledge and understanding regards the process of evolution would reasonably have to conclude that evolution is indeed at work on global biology.\n\nHowever, evolution is not just restricted to biological systems.  Consider our collective sense of humour.  Things which were considered hilarious in the very early part of the 20th century (silent movies) some of that humour is now so old to have lost any humourous content.  Why is that?  Because we've moved on and our tastes have evolved to more complex and alternative themes based on our modern life etc.\n\nConsider financial systems.  They too are evolving.  Capitalism is another test bed for the survival of the fitest.  There are winners and losers just as there are in biology.\n\nThere are many more examples.  The reduction of the variety and extinction of languages etc.\n\nThe validity of Darwinianism is only questioned (or rather refuted) by those of a religious nature who have been indoctrinated against the idea and are determined to continue to deny its validity irrespective of the weight of evidence presented for it.\n\nLogic does not play a part in their argument.  Faith and belief without understanding is all that is required.  In my opinion people who carry on about their lives in this bubble of ignorance are neither rational nor reasonable individuals.  They are brainwashed into submission and ignorance.  And sadly they have a tendency to fight long and hard to stay that way.  Most although not all are beyond help.\n\nOne final example of evolution in action:  It has been predicted that science will have eradicated religion within a couple centuries, as increases in the availability of education and the spread of democracy continue.  Given the negative impact that such religious stigmatisation and dogma is currently having on main stream scientific advancement, as far as I'm concerned, societal evolution resulting in the demise religion can't happen soon enough.
44459
We evolved\nLifeforms, came into existance over a billion years ago, in the form of little more than self replicating molecules, with amino acids and proteins. Eventually by the prosses of natural selection, cells emerged, then multicelled organisms, animals, vertibrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mamals, primates, hominids, and finally, humans began to emerge only a million or so years ago, and civilization less than a mere ten thousand years ago. \nThe complexity of life may lead one to think that randomness could not creat such results. However, with quantum mechanics, one arrives at the conclusion that all possible universes exist, and with the anthropic principle, one sees that only in a rare universe in which evolution has been successfully accomplished can life contemplate these facts.
459525
Physical cosmology is the branch of physics and astrophysics that deals with the study of the physical origins of the Universe (the Cosmos) and the nature of the Universe on its very largest scales.
5808
Nobody really knows for sure.\n\nThere's a theory that the universe is expanding in a spherical shape and will continue to expand until it reaches maximum entropy. At that point all of the energy and matter in the universe will be equally distributed and the universe will no longer be able to support life.\n\nThere's another theory that the universe will expand (again, roughly in the shape of a sphere) until all of the galaxies exhaust their kinetic energy. At that point the universe will begin contracting. When the contracting is complete a singularity containing all of the mass in the universe will form and explode in a big bang.\n\nIf you think about it, if the latter theory is true then it's possible that the universe has expanded and collapsed an infinite number of times in the past!
166140
Evolution is still happening today, so it is observable. However, it takes many generations for any adaptation to become part of the genetic code of a species, and therefore, only in a great many generations will there be any concrete proof. Scientists do not claim to have proved it, at least, none of the scientists I've consulted on this matter. They say there is a lot of evidence to substantiate the theory of evolution and none to disprove it, which I believe to be true. Because of this, it's a theory that has ceased to be contested. However, it is still a theory, with lots of evidence in it's favor but no proof.
724158
Er... the theory of evoltion?  It's just a theory though.  Lots of loop holes.  :)
354548
Do you mean micro-econ. and macro-econ.?
1180171
Hi, EyeLoveJesus!  I like your question!  :-)   Evolution is still a theory---it is not proven 100% yet.  Science is also not stoic and unchanging---it is always flexing and changing over time and by different discoveries.  I don't agree that scientists are "desperate to disprove "god"".   Science isn't focusing on "god".  It is focusing on studying the world and universe.  :-)  Anyway....\n\nScientists tend to form different theories (not facts) from the same discovery.   It is fascinating to learn about the different theories and to decide which one likes better.   Scientists don't think alike at all.  They tend to see different things in the same objects.  :-)   There are usually heated debates and discussions among them!  ;-)\n\nFor me, I know of two different theories of how evolution might have processed:  macro evolution ("giant leaps") or micro-evolution.   I tend to take more stock in micro-evolution.  That means each generation is born with very tiny mutations that will eventually create or de-create whatever trait or physical attribute of the organism.   Macro-evolution happens when one generation is born with a completely different physical attribute that none of the species has.\n\nI hope I clarified.  I will keep an eye on this Q as I find this fascinating!  Thanks for sharing the link.  :-)