Why is it wrong to define evolution as a gradual process?

Question

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html

text line number 29

Answer 1

I'll illustrate by analogy what's wrong with it.  It would be like saying in geology that "orogeny: The gradual process by which the present mountain ranges and peaks arose from plate tectonics which is believed to have been continuing for the past 3000 million years"  While it is detinitely true that mountains are largely a result of tectonic forces that have been active for the past 3 billion years, it's not true that it has always been GRADUAL.  From time to time, there can be and have been very sudden shifts or collapses, or volcanic explosions and lava flows.   It may very well appear to us that both proccesses seem gradual, but that can be very misleading, since it implies a steady continuity in both processes.  If we were to view both process "on fast foward video", we could very well witness uneven and maybe even jerky developments---long periods of apparent inactivity followed by furious changes. It doesn't help understanding, nor is it scientific, to include the word "gradual".  Just leave that one word off.

Answer 2

Because the word "gradual" is vague and subjective.   Gradual *relative to what*?

If species remain relatively unchanged for 300 million years, and then undergo very rapid change and speciation in the span of only 10 million years, that is "gradual" relative to human lifespans, but "sudden" relative to geological timespans.  

So that word "gradual" not a necessary part of the definition of what "evolution" is (which is what that page is about).

Answer 3

It's gradual in the sense that you don't see a great deal of change form generation to generation. For example, vertebrates and invertebrates share a common ancestor, but a fully formed spine didn't just appear in one individual. It appeared gradually over many generations.

You also must understand that generational time is different for each species, so you can't judge the rate of evolution in terms of years. For example, the generation time for humans is about 20 years. In that time you have had 20 generations of cats, 240 generations of mice, 80 generations of Arabidopsis, and 3.5 million generations of E. coli. The more generations, and the more individuals in each generation, the more opportunity for change.

Remember that the driving force of evolution is mutation (both single base pair changes and larger alterations such as chromosome deletions and duplications). MOST mutations have a negative effect (such as gene disruption), the beneficial ones are rare.

Answer 4

We normally are only able to look at and observe ALL of the changes at the same time and note that there indeed have been changes when we look at an old form of the organism, when in truth these large changes came about very slowly by the random mutation of each of the individual genes involved and so in truth it is not a gradual process but it does take time for the change to be noticeable.