However, this line of argument is not logically correct. Just because I can jump an inch does not mean I can jump to the moon. Just because I can walk an inch does not mean I can walk around the world.
When you jump, you are using muscle energy to raise your body against gravity. Furthermore, the energy is stored as increased gravitational potential, which is why you come down when you jump. When you walk, you use muscle energy which is thereby depleted. Evolution isn't much like either thing, unless the walker is 1) allowed to rest and feed, and 2) not limited by oceans. Then walking can be like evolution.
Evolutionary drift has no energy cost and no stored return force. Once two populations drift a little bit apart, they can just as easily drift a little bit more apart as go back the other way. At any given point, they can do anything in response to the pressures they're under.
Here's an honest analogy. Your position is like claiming a hydrogen balloon released at spot A must forever bob and float about spot A, never getting far away. That's one behavior it almost certainly won't do.
The dishonesty of your analogy is instantly obvious and pathetic. That's your science and it's pitiful.
So it means you can jump as high as you want?
Clearly there are limits to high one can jump based on the physical anatomy, not just gravity.
Evolutionary drift has no energy cost and no stored return force. Once two populations drift a little bit apart, they can just as easily drift a little bit more apart as go back the other way. At any given point, they can do anything in response to the pressures they're under.
They cannot 'jump' genetically to another species.
Your fantasy thinking is showing.
Here's an honest analogy. Your position is like claiming a hydrogen balloon released at spot A must forever bob and float about spot A, never getting far away. That's one behavior it almost certainly won't do.
The reality is that there are limits on everything, including hydrogen balloons.
Stop trying to talk away the facts, they are what they are.
The dishonesty of your analogy is instantly obvious and pathetic. That's your science and it's pitiful.
Actually, the only thing that is pitiful is your lack of science, which cannot come up with an answer to the facts that Macro evolution is impossible.
Every example you gave was that of Micro not Macro evolution.
Alchemy is more likely then Macro evolution.
But when the 2nd Law of Thermodynmics kicks in on your body and you find yourself looking into the face of your Creator, you can give your analogies to Him.
I am sure He is going to find them very amusing.