Criticizing neo-Darwinism

I can't believe you're playing Martin's game again. What is the difference between the "no new orders since the KT extinction" and the highly specious "no new phyla since the Cambrian" arguments? Regardless of whether or not there are any new orders appearing in the Eocene (we're talking at the level of Monotremata etc., after all), it is quite clear that there has been a huge increase in the number of mammalian families, to say nothing of mammalian species. Therefore Martin's conclusion that "evolution has stopped" is utterly spurious and without foundation.