Well, are horses and donkeys different species or not? Clearly (to me) not, because they can't produce fertile offspring. Assuming (for the sake of argument) they are descended from a common ancestor, just what 'new characteristics... that were completely absent..' are involved here? IOW, you're trying to set up a strawman - evolution is generally defined as the change in gene (allele) frequencies over time - it says nothing about brand new stuff being required.
such as a new organ or limb or wings or something
That sounds more like metamorphosis, which is a part of some theistic systems but has never been observed in the natural world.
darwinian slip...
That sounds more like metamorphosis, which is a part of some theistic systems but has never been observed in the natural world.
Darwinian evolution literally is things acquiring something completely new. Everything is supposed to have descended from single cell organisms. Did single cell organisms have legs? Did they have brains? They had to develop somewhere along the line. There was something without a brain, and then something later on with a brain. Again, you should at least understand the most basic elements of the theory you are promoting.