http://darwiniana.com/?s=stream+and+sequence This links to the long list of posts on the stream and sequence topic, a popular approach to the so-called ‘macro model’.
Before we criticize darwinists for being deceptive, we must also consider the possibility that the issue of evolution is too complex and confusing to sort out, at first. We cling to the basic thesis of natural selection because it supports the illusion of science and keeps the myth of science functional. The reality, that science in its current form can’t really resolve the question of evolution, goes unnoticed.
One value of the macro model of WHEE, as seen in the ‘stream and sequence’ series, is its reminder that visualizing evolution is very difficult. And as a result we can’t really get a sense of what the term means. There is no set of facts for almost all cases of evolution that can be pointed to as an explanation. Instead the cover story of ‘natural selection’ is applied automatically to all cases. Unverified, simply assumed.
One aspect of this is the telescoped compression timeline of evolution ‘long ago’ in deep time. It is especially useful to make natural selection the dynamics there. It is the one idea that can be applied to those huge time spans, which we can’t really observe.
The value of the study of history in relatively recent times is that this illusion is suddenly challenged and dispelled: we can’t just assume that something happened: we can by and large actually zoom in to see how something happened. And if that sequencing actually shows some kind of ‘evolution’, then we get a reality check. So the stream and sequence posts explore the way the architecture of relatively recent history shows the forms of evolution we had not suspected, and which we had repressed from view, keeping our gaze on deep time.