Yes there are real biologists who dont accept the GTE but who do accept adaption and speciation.[Edit] Thanks V, for your reply to my post. I think that level of invective shows I made a few good points.......
I don't know what your teacher is talking about. I suspect he is a fundamentalist Christian and is engaging in what is commonly referred to as "lying for Jesus".
Just from the wording it sounds like he's very poorly educated, and probably has absolutely no business teaching in a science classroom.
No one with an ounce of credibility considers creationism a legitimate position.
"The environment would select organisms with the best genes or adaptations to survive (AKA “survival of the fittest” - microevolution
Sometimes adaptations would allow a new species to arise."
There is ample proof of these two propositions and they are accepted by at least some creationists.
"all species had descended or evolved from a single ancestor (marine bacteria) over time by natural selection - macroevolution." (General Theory of Evolution (GTE))
The "proof" for this is disputed. I don't know of one example from living organisms that actually supports this. However the fossil record does appear to show an increase in complexity over time but at the same time it does not show the gradual transition of one kind to another that macroevolution requires.
While the use of the terms micro- and macro-evolution is not universally accepted, and not precisely defined, there are also varying definitions of Evolution; and even "species" can be difficult to pin down (see Ring Species). Anyone who claims "they're both evolution, which is one process, not two." doesn't really understand the distinction and is likely to be deceived into thinking that an example of adaption and or speciation supports the General Theory of Evolution. For example they might think that development of antibiotic resistance supports microbes to man evolution.
Yes there are real biologists who don't accept the GTE but who do accept adaption and speciation.
[Edit] Thanks V, for your reply to my post. I think that level of invective shows I made a few good points.
