Consider that question, and the meaning of the words, and you can answer it yourself.
'Micro' v. 'macro' is only 'little' v. 'big'.
At what point do you say that something that has changed a large number of small times has been changed in a big way?
It would depend on the specifics of the changes, in every example from the real world I can think of.
While believing in the "little" changes, I disagree with your conclusion they have led to the "big" changes.
The evidence cited -- and judgeing by these crevo lists, I'd say exclusively -- is the DNA-less fossil record, which I think is too open to interpretation to be considered proof, and the phylogenic tree. Evolution seems more designed to explain the tree rather than the tree proving evolution.
On the other hand, confidently held tenets of evolution such as Haeckel's drawings have been found to be false.