“At what point does microevolution crease, wouldn’t a million years of microevolutionary changes add up to macroevolution?” [excerpt]That is besides the point.
“The perceived difference between “microevolution and macroevolution” was not one of the 14 points because if you accept “microevolution” then you accept the premise of the evolutionary theory.” [excerpt]Depends on who gets to define micro-evolution.
“So we are both in agreement, with the disagreement being of the amount of time involved.” [excerpt]Not by a long shot.
“If you have a problem with evolution then it is one of those 14 points.” [excerpt]My ‘problem’ is with your apparent lack of scientific objectivity.
“Which one is it, and what evidence do you have to support your assertion?” [excerpt]Your refusal to demonstrate your claims supports my assertion that your claims are statements of faith.
Observation is not a matter of faith.
Number 14 does address your point it states that direct observation of living forms and extinct forms indirectly observed from the fossil record support my assertion that there has been sufficient time to account for the diversity of life we see today.
What empirical evidence do you have to the contrary?
What do think the difference is between microevolution & macroevolution?
Which of the 14 points do you have a problem with?