[bondserv]

Based on these, evolution is a theory. CS and ID are beliefs.

Microevolution is a theory. Macroevolution is a belief.

There is evidence that supports that organisms change with time. In fact many species experience so much Microevolution, they go extinct. We have thousands of examples.

Macroevolution has no evidence. We do not have a demonstrably new species that shows evidence of more complexity (such as an improved system that functions better than it's ancestors or non-degraded element of an organisms DNA that demonstrates a branch of programing, via RMNS, not found in it's ancestor).

When scientists overcome these shortcomings regarding Macroevolution, we would have something to debate.

[Coyoteman]

Macroevolution has no evidence. We do not have a demonstrably new species that shows evidence of more complexity (such as an improved system that functions better than it's ancestors or non-degraded element of an organisms DNA that demonstrates a branch of programing, via RMNS, not found in it's ancestor).

No evidence?

You want a new species that has more complexity? How about humans; we have a larger brain that functions better than the brains of our ancestors.

Now, see? That was easy.