The following is from my son's College Biology Textbook, Biology, Sixth Edition, Campbell & Reece, 2002, page 476:
"Speciation is at the boundary between microevolution and macroevolution. Microevolution is a change over the genetics in a population's allele frequencies, mainly by genetic drift and natural selection. ...Yet the cumulative change during millions of speciation episodes over vast tracts of time must account for macroevolution, the level of change that is evident over the time scale of the fossil record."
"Must" account for macroevolution? They sure don't sound too confident about that do they? This is an interesting admission.
As I'm sure you have been informed of many times before, all scientific findings are considered tentative and based on level of certainty not 'proof'. Because of this, science literature is couched in tentative terminology, which unfortunately does not well express the confidence level of the findings.
Using the existence of this language as evidence against science can be easily construed as disingenuous. It is also ineffective.