Does microevolution logically include macroevolution?

Hi Springer:I've jumped into this discussion a bit late, but I would like to ask why you keep making statements about breeding dogs to produce otters and other such nonsense, such as this:What point are your trying to make here? Seriously, what are you trying to convey with statements like this? Show me where ANY evolutionary biologist has ever made the claim that otters came from dogs, or bats came from rodents.
Look, a dog is a dog and an otter is an otter. Dogs will produce other dogs and otters will produce other otters. What the ToE tells us is that otters and dogs share a common ancestor...NOT that one gave rise to the other. They have diverged from this common ancestor to become what we call dogs and otters. By asking us to produce an otter from a dog, you are simply demonstrating complete ignorance about what the ToE actually says.I guess it would be possible to set up a dog breading program in such a manner that we could theoretically produce an animal that resembles an otter more than it resembles a dog, but it still would NOT be an otter. Hey, a good starting point would be to start crossing Labrador Retrievers with Dachshunds. Labs already have an oily coat and webbed feet while Dachshunds have the basic, tube-like body forms of an otter. What we would end up with, I have no idea. What I do know is that while it's entirely possible that it would no longer be a dog, it would also not be an otter, so what’s your point?Evolution can (and often does) result in the convergence of two species. Perhaps this is the area that leads to your confusion. Convergent evolution does not mean that two separate species will evolve into a single species. It simply means that two species may very well share many morphological, physiological, and behavioral characteristics if they have evolved in similar habitats, even if these habitats are on separate Continents. Perhaps this is the area of evolutionary biology that has led to your confusion.