volution is defined as evolution involving small changes. Microevolution does not require the evolution of new structures or organs, Therefore, microevolution does not involve the creation of new genes.Changes to existing genes (mutations) result in variation. Natural selection acts on this variation and preserves the best. So while the variation may be random, the process of microevolution is not.Natural selection preserves favorable variations at the expense of less favorable variations. This process optimizes existing genes.Natural selection forces animals and plants to adapt. Microevolution happens, and it has been observed in numerous scientific experiments.The real question is not whether or not microevolution happens. It does, but can microevolution be extended to explain large evolutionary changes? Such changes require new genes.Natural selection only optimizes existing genes: If a gene does not exist, it cannot provide a selective advantage. Natural selection only operates on existing genes.When an existing gene tries to evolve into a new gene, the evolving gene must provide some selective advantage, before natural selection can drive the transition. (The declaration of many evolutionists that natural selection drives the transition every step of the way, implies that the evolving gene must perform its new function before it evolves into the new gene. This is like saying a bird with no wings can fly.)Random chance not natural selection is responsible for the evolution of new genes. Until an evolving gene offers some competitive advantage, natural selection is out of the picture.If evolution is not a viable theory, then why is it generally accepted by modern science and why is it often taught as a proven fact in high school and college?To answer this question, let us take a trip back in time to the late 1800's. Darwin observed birds on the Galapagos islands over 100 years ago, and the variation that he saw led him to the theory ...
