Further to word games around the term “Darwinism,” another friend writes to comment on another word game intended to subvert discussions of just how much information Darwinism (natural selection acting on random mutation) can load into a life form within the probability bounds of our universe (micro- vs. macro- evolution):
Another popular word game played by Darwinists is to claim that creationists invented the words microevolution and macroevolution. But the words were coined by Russian neo-darwinist Yuri Filipchenko and subsequently used by his student Theodosius Dobzhansky (also a neo-darwinist) in the 1930s:
“There is no way toward an understanding of the mechanisms of macroevolutionary changes, which require time on a geological scale, other than through a full comprehension of the microevolutionary processes observable within the span of a human lifetime and often controlled by man’s will. For this reason we are compelled at the present level of knowledge reluctantly to put a sign of equality between the mechanisms of macro- and microevolution, and proceeding on this assumption, to push our investigations as far ahead as this working hypothesis will permit.” – Genetics and the Origin of Species (New York: Columbia University Press, 1937), 12.
Also, from Casey Luskin at Evolution News & Views,
When engaging in debates, every once in a while I hear the claim that Darwin-critics also invented terms like “microevolution” or “macroevolution.” For example, Jonathan Wells reports, “In 2005, Darwinist Gary Hurd claimed that the distinction between microevolution and macroevolution was just a creationist fabrication. … Hurd wrote to the Kansas State Board of Education: “…’macro’ and ‘micro’ evolution … have no meaning outside of creationist polemics.” (Jonathan Wells, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, pgs. 55-56). This is also a Darwinian urban legend, for such terms have been used regularly in the scientific literature. Indeed, textbooks commonly teach this terminology, including two of the textbooks I used in college when learning about evolutionary biology.
The glossary of my college introductory biology text, Campbell’s Biology (4th Ed.) states: “macroevolution: Evolutionary change on a grand scale, encompassing the origin of novel designs, evolutionary trends, adaptive radiation, and mass extinction.” Futuyma’s Evolutionary Biology, a text I used for an upper-division evolutionary biology course, states, “In Chapters 2h3 through 25, we will analyze the principles of MACROEVOLUTION, that is, the origin and diversification of higher taxa.” (pg. 447, emphasis in original). Similarly, these textbooks respectively define “microevolution” as “a change in the gene pool of a population over a succession of generations” and “slight, short-term evolutionary changes within species.” Clearly Darwin-skeptics did not invent these terms. More. (2007)
This kind of information about terminology is, of course, useful only to those who need to know what is going on.
Darwinians who engage in word games and the audiences who hear them gladly need to avoid the issue that Darwinism is not testable or falsifiable*, makes no predictions, and explains observed facts poorly. Yet powerful lobbies demand that it be taught in the schools as “evolution.” They seem to dread the sight of an open window.
*Note: “Falsifiability, a principle developed by philosopher of science Karl Popper (1902–1994), offers this test: A theory is scientific if evidence could disprove it. If a theory is so general as to be consistent with any state of evidence or is constantly undergoing revision to deal with contrary evidence, it is not scientific. Popper was impressed by Einstein’s theories because evidence could disprove them, but didn’t. More.”
See also: The term “Darwinism” was coined by enemies of Darwin to make him look bad?
Claim: Evolutionists do not use the term “Darwinism.” Yes they do. This is just another word game.
and
Question for multiverse theorists: To what can science appeal, if not evidence?