How is the human hand a good example of microevolution?

Our pinkie fingers are getting progressively larger while our pinkie toes are getting smaller...

This is because we've needed our 5th finger for gripping tools over the last 20,000 years, thus saving it from the same fate as our last little piggy.

Actually comparing human hands with other primates is macroevolution.

Microevolution is the study of the change in occurrence of certain traits (or alleles if you go into the genetics part of it) within the SAME species.

In this case, there are many traits linked with the human hand which include (but are not limited to):

- Hand/finger length and width

- Bent little finger

- Length of ring finger versus index finger

- Hitchhiker's thumb

If you want to use the human hand as an example of microevolution you need to do some research into the occurrence of different traits in different areas of the world and infer whether a certain trait confers an evolutionary advantage that would explain its prevalence.

Unfortunately for your essay, microevolution is usually the clearest when there is strong evolutionary pressure (i.e. the sickle cell gene and malaria). The human hand is a poor choice for observing microevolution, since unless a trait seriously handicaps an individual's survivability, there would be little difference in the occurrence of the traits.

However, if you step away from the survival aspect of evolution, you will be able come up with a good analogy of microevolution in human society. Certain traits may give an individual an advantage in certain professions, so the trait will appear more often in those professions.

For example, if you take the population of musicians in the world, you will probably observe:

- Most piano players have longer hands.

- The occurrence of longer hands would not be prevalent in other musicians such as trumpet players.

Microevolution In Humans

Once we are born, we must adapt to what is going on around us. This means we also must start a prolonged period of learning. We learn or "evolve" to take our first steps, say our first word, and how to write.

If a person does not have the opportunity to learn those things, like a "feral child" for instance, we don't progress.

Addendum: Actually, I misread your question. I've never heard of microevolution. Unless you mean that the fingers on a human hand are like various branches off the evolutionary tree we all came from.

I am assuming the "microevolution" is just a term for the evolution that creationists can't explain away

I hope this is a philosophy essay, not a science essay.

It is not an example of microevolution - whatever you mean by that?

Nor is an example of evolution. The human hand ws created to do what it does, and it does it very well. There is no evidence that it has 'evolved' from anything else.

Evolutionists often claim that it must have evolved since it is homologous to the hands/feet of other animals. Perhaps this is what you mean by microevolution.

However homology is no better an argument for evolution than it is for creation. A common designer might be expected to reuse common (and good) design principles.

Perhaps people and dogs both have toes becuase toes are useful for walking - not because they have a common ancestor.

Check here for some detailed articles on homology

http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/cha...

http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1818

I'm not 100% about this question BUT, I'm going to take a guess. I'm thinking...if I'm even close...that an example could be the way we can't bent the tip or our pinky without moving our ring finger! Try it, it's ridiculous :P

Humans are the only existing hominid with an opposable thumb on each hand, lower hominids thumbs tend to stay in line with the other fingers.

There is no " microevolutionary theory. " The hand is a morphological change over time in response to random mutation and selection pressure in primates and their progenitors. A good example of evolution!!

Antrhopologists and biologists alike accept the theory of evolution.

Thus, the topic of your essay is about a bogus and unscientific "theory".