One of the points that Creationist apologists will use against evolution is that of macroevolution.  Without truly understanding the difference between micro and macroevolution, Creationists claim that macroevolution “does not and did not happen”.

A fantastic tool to help explain macroevolution is the image below (click it to see a larger, more legible version):

Macroevolution Explained - click to see larger version

From Wikipedia, macroevolution is commonly misused by Creationists:

The term “macroevolution” frequently arises within the context of the evolution/creation debate, usually used by creationists alleging a significant difference between the evolutionary changes observed in field and laboratory studies and the larger scale macroevolutionary changes that scientists believe to have taken thousands or millions of years to occur. They accept that evolutionary change is possible within what they call “kinds” (“microevolution”), but deny that one “kind” can evolve into another (“macroevolution”).

Contrary to this belief among the anti-evolution movement proponents, evolution of life forms beyond the species level (i.e. speciation) has indeed been observed multiple times under both controlled laboratory conditions and in nature. In creation science, creationists accepted speciation as occurring within a “created kind” or “baramin”, but objected to what they called “third level-macroevolution” of a new genus or higher rank in taxonomy.

Generally, there is ambiguity as to where they draw a line on “species”, “created kinds”, etc. and what events and lineages fall within the rubric of microevolution or macroevolution. The claim that macroevolution does not occur, or is impossible, is not supported by the scientific community.

  • joshua glover

    There is no point arguing with creationists. They ignore everything that is inconvenient to their beliefs. Including the bible more often than not.

    • Jim Fox

      “Playing chess with a pigeon”?