However, the back-and-forth I had with a commenter named Paul was informative and enjoyable. Therefore, I propose that this discussion continue in this thread.
To briefly sum up:
- I allowed for the possibility of plant macroevolution (MEvo) due to polyploidy.
- I remain unconvinced that the examples of speciation given represented evidence for animal MEvo; rather, the speciations listed are good evidence of animal microevolution (mEvo).
- A discussion took place over the effectiveness of historical sciences (which was started by this article by Dr. Massimo Pigliucci). I criticised evolutionary biology, paleontology, and anthropology for not paying attention to the fine details.
- Paul took mild exception to my "selection" of gradualism (which I believe is the standard paradigm of MEvo) over saltation (i.e. punctuated equilibrium), stating that gradualism does not represent the "current thinking". I mentioned I was very interested in the particulars of this "current thinking".
- I asked for, but never received, the mechanisms of MEvo (I have seen a comprehensive list of about 40+ mechanisms listed at a blog, but I can't recall where I have seen them. Help anyone?).
"Keep your stick on the ice"