Creationists (and those who argue the false macro/micro evolutionary dichotomy) are playing conceptual games.
If it is a false dichotomy, why do we have two different terms - evolution and natural selection?
They demand adherence to rigid categories of classification
Do you object to words having consistent meanings? If so, why?
Both the fossil record and contemporary nature are full of such intermediary forms at all scales.
Actually, this is not true either. Perhaps the only prediction that the theory of evolution ever made was that this would be the case, but it turned out to be false. But this did not disprove evolution because it is not a scientific theory. It is infinitely adaptable - hence punctuated equilibria - again, not a prediction, but a post-hoc explanation.
However, once you start looking deeper into statistical distribution of individual traits and even genetics, the evidence for gradual evolutionary change over (very) long time periods becomes more obvious.
Oh look, someone who has turned evolution into a religion and uses it to reject the real evidence.
If you read more widely you would see how your view that evolutionary science isn’t science is based on semantic confusion and placing too much credence on an ill thought out non scientific article on a political website (your link).
Why are you incapable of explaining it yourself?
The experiment of evolution is ongoing and the evidence of what it has created and leaves behind can and is studied by many scientists. Each can draw his own conclusions and validate or refute it according to scientific method.
Actually, they can't use the scientific method to disprove it. It is not possible to design a scientific experiment that would disprove the theory of evolution, if it were incorrect.
Evolution involves the gradual changes from simple to more complex forms.
