You are straying from the topic, and debating things that are not part of the theory of evolution
The pond scum question is a common misconception.
From the 14 points:
“While the origins of life are a question of interest to evolutionary biologist and frequently studied in conjunction with researchers from other fields such as geochemistry and organic chemistry, the core of evolutionary theory itself does not rest on a foundation that requires any knowledge about the origins of life on earth. It is primarily concerned with the change and diversification of life after the origins of the earliest living things”
As far as the entire microevolution vs macroevolution rabbit trail, I have asked you several times to explain your understanding of the difference between the two.
Microevolution and macroevolution are both forms of evolution so debating the differences does nothing as far as addressing the 14 points that make up the core of the Theory of Evolution.
Which of the 14 points do you have a problem with, and what evidence do you have to support your position?
“You are straying from the topic, and debating things that are not part of the theory of evolutionI guess you don't know what the word colloquial means.
The pond scum question is a common misconception.” [excerpt]
“From the 14 points:” [excerpt]Still trying to change the subject I see.
“As far as the entire microevolution vs macroevolution rabbit trail, I have asked you several times to explain your understanding of the difference between the two.” [excerpt]It depends on how you want to define micro.
“Microevolution and macroevolution are both forms of evolution …” [excerpt]Would those both be upward evolution?
“Which of the 14 points do you have a problem with, and what evidence do you have to support your position?” [excerpt]Objectivity first, points later.