I was led to this page by using Google, and your phrase, "step-by-step example of macroevolution", so it should by rights have information that we both would find interesting or fascinating by various degrees.
Note that the researchers consider the facts and evidence thoroughly, dispassionately, and without regard to the direction in which those facts seem to lead. What more could one ask in a search for truth?
Here is a passage of relevance to our discussion. I have bolded the portion which relates to my above description of chromosomes becoming longer. :
"... the common descent hypothesis would have been falsified if the universal phylogenetic trees determined from the independent molecular and morphological evidence did not match with statistical significance. Furthermore, we are now in a position to begin construction of phylogenetic trees based on other independent lines of data, such as chromosomal organization. In a very general sense, chromosome number and length and the chromosomal position of genes are all causally independent of both morphology and of sequence identity. Phylogenies constructed from these data should recapitulate the standard phylogenetic tree as well ..."Curiously, you may have had great confidence in the likelihood of my failing to find bolstering information for my hypothesis, but I found it surprisingly easy to do.
Perhaps you would be better advised to seek such information yourself before posting comments from individuals obviously no better qualified to comment on these matters than am I, and ones much more likely to be mistaken for having a biased viewpoint to begin with.
First, your link leads back to Free Republic and gives the message “document not found.” Second, what is it that you think your dataless, contextless paragraph proves exactly?