I once asked a forum what the difference between Microevolution and Macroevolution is.

For those who are not familiar with the jargon, this is the actual answer:

Microevolution occurs within species. The famous peppered moth of Industrial Britain is an example. It got darker as more soot appeared on the walls and trees as it perched. The reason for this is simple. Those moths that did not resemble the background were eaten. Thus only the darker moths reproduced, propagating the genes for dark colouring in the gene pool. Most creationists I have encountered have no problem with this idea.

Macroevolution is speciation. One species splitting from another. This is the bit that creationists object to. Darwin said that it happens. Creationists maintain that each species was an act of special creation according to Genesis. My personal opinion is that Eldridge and Gould's theory of Punctuated Equilibrium provides quite a plausible mechanism for speciation. There may well be other mechanisms equally plausible.

However, this is not what the Creationists feel. Here is the response I got to my query on the forum:

Very simple.

Microevolution - You look at your brother and notice that he looks different from you. He's not your identical twin.

Macroevolution - You see fish coming out of the sea, growing legs, arms, scales, then shedding scales, then growing fur instead, then devoloping mammary glands, then developing a system of reproduction consisting of sperm and eggs, then developing warm-bloodedness, then losing the legs and arms, going back into the sea as whales, at the same time developing six legs and wings, develop flight, head, thorax, and abdomen, then develop leaves, bark, photosynthesis, prickly needles for self-defense(cactus), then a different system of reproduction consisting of pistils and stamens, then pollen at the same time that bees are developing, then developing photoreceptor cells which eventually become eyes, then develop different types of eyes again and again and again, then gradually losing the two front legs, flop around for a bit because you have neither legs nor wings, then finally get wings so you can fly, then gradually somehow transform paws into hands, then walk upright, then lose fur, (oh sorry, we already did that when we turned into whales), grow your cranium bigger, then finally MAN!

My response to this was quite simple:

Right then, we all agree. Macroevolution can not and does not happen. Luckily, Darwinian evolution does not work like that. What are we arguing about then?