Can I disprove Macro-Evolution

Then if it did happen why isn't there at least one verified instance of 'Macro-Evolution' occuring?

The best-documented creations of new species in the laboratory were performed in the late 1980s. William Rice and G.W. Salt bred fruit flies, Drosophila melanogaster, using a maze with three different choices of habitat such as light/dark and wet/dry. Each generation was placed into the maze, and the groups of flies that came out of two of the eight exits were set apart to breed with each other in their respective groups. After thirty-five generations, the two groups and their offspring were isolated reproductively because of their strong habitat preferences: they mated only within the areas they preferred, and so did not mate with flies that preferred the other areas The history of such attempts is described in Rice and Hostert (1993).

The House mice (Mus musculus L.) of the Faroe Islands (62N, 7W) are frequently quoted as examples of rapid evolution, because they seem to be clearly differentiated both from mice in other parts of the world, and between different islands within the Faroe group despite being introduced through human agency within the last millennium. They are also of interest in being among the most climatically stressed mice in the Northern Hemisphere.The present study is an attempt to determine the extent of differentiation between the populations on the six Faroe islands which harbour mice. It is based on size and organ weights, measurements on the mandibles and scapulae, non-metrical variation of the skeleton, and allozymic frequencies at 22 loci. Distance statistics calculated for all five groups of data between samples from each island compared with every other, showed that all the populations were clearly distinct. However the distances calculated from the different data were disconcertingly heterogeneous. The most likely explanation is that the different characteristics scored each depend on a relatively small number of different genes.Taking all the results together, it seems most probable that mice first entered the Faroes via the main port of Torshavn and spread from there to Nols0y, Hestur and Sand0y, and from Sand0y to Fugloy and Mykines. The large inter-island differences can be attributed primarily to instant sub-speciation produced by each colonization depending on a probable small number of effective founders.

Since all those modifications could be and was made by microevolution where is the 'Macro-Evolution'?

So no My avatar is of a very large horse and a very small horse. They both are 100% horse with over 2000 pounds of flesh and bone difference. It would be physically impossible for them to breed. So according to the definition of species they are two different creatures

I will take your word for what you said above that I quoted.But if you want to present 'Macro-Evolution' you need to provide an instance of one critter becoming a totaly different critter.When that fruit fly ceases to be a fruit fly.When that mouse ceases to be a mouse.I would ask for something other than your word for that.

What is the common ancestor of chimps and humans?You have pictures of 14 different skulls and some of them only being fragments.The only thing you verified by these pictures is that a creature with that skull existed at one time. Anything else you claim is verified is nothing more than a conclusion.

A man leaves point A and a man reaches point B where is the 'Macro-Evolution'?

Not one verifiable instance of 'Macro-Evolution' has not been shown to have occured.

We do not have a 4.6 billion years of history. We have a book of 4.6 million years with many chapters covering millions of years missing.

So in other words, you won't believe it unless there's evidence of every single step of the way, until each and every question has been answered.Of course, that's not science. That's irrationality.

Well this creationist believes that your mice that can not breed with other mice is still mice.When they cease to be mice then 'Macro-Evolution' will have taken place.

If that is true could you tell me where I could pick up a cross between a Great Dane and a Chihuahua?

You can call it anything you want to call it. But if you start with two mice and a billion years later you got trillions of mice and billions of them can not breed with each other because of changes or habits you still got trillions of mice, whether they can breed with each other or not.

Well this creationist believes that your mice that can not breed with other mice is still mice.When they cease to be mice then 'Macro-Evolution' will have taken place.

If that is true could you tell me where I could pick up a cross between a Great Dane and a Chihuahua?

You can call it anything you want to call it. But if you start with two mice and a billion years later you got trillions of mice and billions of them can not breed with each other because of changes or habits you still got trillions of mice, whether they can breed with each other or not.

Transmutation is a strong word meaning changing one element into another element. Example changing steel into gold. Non life into life. One creature into a totaly different creature.That is 'Macro-Evolution'.

I will hereby make a prediction that in the very near future that the word 'Macro-Evolution' will cease to be used except by creationist, or when someone is answering a creationist.

Why does it seem like ICANT is totally avoiding frakos question?

I have no problem with your non breeding mice being a different species of mice.But they are still mice.