While I respect your career and the talents that you possess, your qualifications are irrelevant to me for this particular topic. We differ on what we perceive as major evolutionary change. Macro-evolution is a misleading term with many perceptions to it. I'm afraid many have taken advantage of the word "macro-evolution" to claim facts that are not facts. Regardless of what career you're in, how long you've been doing such.... the reality remains the same for certain elements there are absolutely no evidence for. Anyone can create/design mythological creatures using their imagination to get an idea of what said creature's fossils should look like in the transition of major evolutionary change and accept them as fact. I can label you and others a "Creationist" as well for doing such. But it's a fact that these creatures do not currently exist. You can have faith that they exist or will be discovered at some point, but to claim mythological creatures as fact is pseudoscience. The difference between me and other "evolutionists" is I'm not afraid to state the current fact of this.
My views are currently as to what is factual: everything evolves, land life evolves, sea life evolves, flying creatures evolve, human beings evolve, human animals evolve. They all don't have to come from one another to deny evolution. I haven't opened the known barriers for certain things and have stated them as facts like many seem to.
Never stated that natural selection was the only principle involved. I stated that there are a lot of issues with natural selection in its current state.
You have made a lot of challenges to the science of evolution, and evolution is based on very sophisticated Biochemistry, Biology, Genetics, and the various fields of Geology. To challenge and disagree with evolution when you are clueless as to the science involved is absolutely ludicrous. It is like asking a janitor to build a 747. Your argument totally lacks peer reviewed scientific articles to support this line of reasoning.
The argument for a difference between micro evolution and macro evolution is strictly a Fundamentalist Christian argument based on a religious agenda and not one remotely associated with science.
You are not being honest concerning your religious agenda in this dialogue.