[metmom]

The problem is, as Carl Zimmer once said, “If you accept microevolution, you get macroevolution for free.” Macroevolution is just microevolution over time. Eventually, enough genetic and/or geographical drift occurs that they become new species — organisms that no longer breed with one another.

No. Macroevolution is just microevolution extrapolated and extrapolation is not science. It's a philosophical conclusion that has yet to be demonstrated in practice, and lining up a bunch of fossils is not actual observed, testable, repeatable lab work.

[Natural Law]

"extrapolation is not science."

Sorry, but extrapolation is a process in mathematics used to find the value of a function outside its tabulated values. This is done as in interpolation by assuming that over a small range of x the function may be closely approximated by a polynomial or some other readily computed function. Any of the interpolation formulas can be used, therefore, and the desired value of x substituted in them.

[ColdWater]

> extrapolation is not science.<

Really?

“Spatial extrapolation: the science of predicting ecological patterns and processes.”

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-246263/Spatial-extrapolation-the-science-of.html

[Ira_Louvin]

So you cannot observe the fossils, or compare them to other fossils, or have them reviewed by other paleontologist to see if they come to the same conclusion?