You keep claiming to have some scientific training, but you keep using unscientific terms like "macro-evolution" and "devolution" and asking for things like "stronger proof." Methinks you haven't cracked an honest-to-goodness science treatise since your father told you your high school biology class was the work of the devil.
Wrong on all counts! I have never claimed anything about myself for one thing. As to devolution, I find in my dictionary:
devolution, n, 1. transference from one individual to another as a. a passing or devolving (as of rights) upon a successor b: delegation or conferral to a subordinate c: the surrender of powers to local authorities by a central government 2. retrograde evolution: degeneration.
As to macro-evolution, this is a term which is often used in regards to evolution. Since Darwin, evolutionists have tried to confound two different kinds of changes in species - adaptational changes and transformational changes. No one argues with adaptational changes. Even the most virulent anti-evolutionists do not deny that species adapt to different environments and situations. What the whole evolution debate is about though is transformational changes. Species transforming themselves into other species. I (and many others) use the terms micro-evolution and macro-evolution to distinguish from these two kinds of changes. BTW I note lots of articles discussing macro-evolution in your list-o-links in post#650 on this thread!