Actually the artificial distinction between the two only furthers to confuse the issues. But lets just address your statements. In experiments and data both macro and micro evolution has been observed.
After all, evolution, as any science, is solidly grounded in observation, data, hypothesis and prediction.
It is funny that something which is so obvious in data is being denied to have happened. It's not a question anymore of did it happen but 'how did it happen'.
I just wish that more people were aware of these facts.
Perhaps some links to some reading materials might help
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html : Evidence for Common Descent and Macroevolution.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html What is macro-evolution
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html Observed instances of speciation
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html Transitional fossils
----------
> From: Pim van Meurs <entheta@eskimo.com>
> To: evolution@calvin.edu; 's_leyla@usa.net'
> Subject: RE: Introducing the Science&Research Foundation
> Date: Sunday, August 02, 1998 7:39 AM
>
> S_leyla: All along the conference the lecturers added that evolution was
only an
> assumption which had no single evidence>>
>
> The irony!!! And they call themselves Science and Research Foundation.
>
> If it were not that sad, it might almost be funny.
>