Sep 10th 2008 5:01PM Spartacus, Phinehas: There indeed is no diréct proof for macroevolution. In the first place because, well, if it happened for all of today's species, we just weren't around.
You're also right about the peak of the "Mount Improbable" sounding like a goal, and in that sense, the "Mount Improbable" isn't that good a metaphor. There is no peak in (macro)evolution, no ultimate goal, no predestitation, only random mutations, selection and other evolutionary forces, just like in microevolution.
Oh, and sorry Spartacus, but ever since Michael Behe came up with "Irriducable Complexity", well... let's just say I'm skeptical about him.
All that said, I do respect your views, and I understand where they come from.
Sep 10th 2008 2:40PM Phinehas, the divide between micro- and macroevolution is artificial, the only difference being scale (and time). Macroevolution is just the combined effects of microevolution.
All proof for "microevolution" is in itself proof for "macroevolution".
Aug 22nd 2008 6:06AM Best wishes to Ezra, I hope he gets better soon.
Nov 20th 2007 3:57PM @2 True, it's always been that way, let's hope they don't hotfix it :p
Nov 5th 2007 4:42PM Again: The uproar on the Shaman forums was caused because constructive posts regarding the dps nerf and DR on ES were deleted, and the posters banned, just to shut them up. Get your facts straight.
Nov 5th 2007 12:16PM The reason the uproar actually started, was because blizzard deleted a lot of constructive posts with proof about the clear nerfs in 2.3 and banned the posters without any warning, not just because of the ES on DR thingy. Just thought I'd point that out.