Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite

[Fake Messiah]

The reason I mention the 24 hour fruit fly is because we can observe hundreds generational changes in a matter of months., but again these fruit flies even have 100's of billions of observed genetic/inter species generational changes they have NEVER MORPHED into another species. Thus there has NEVER Been An observed example of species evolving or morphing into another. Your attempt to try and push inner species evolution as species evolution is an intellectually dishonest attempt of confusing the topic. or you simply do not understand the macro changes of evolution Darwin purposes against your own dealing with micro changes in a given species.

Here is a question that no creationist that I have asked has been able to answer and allows me to disregard your entire point about the 24 hour fruit fly.

What mechanism is in place to stop small changes from accumulating over many generations?

Now to explain about the 24 hour fruit fly. You are making assumptions about how quickly evolution works. What you are also ignoring and probably don't remember or know because you do not understand the theory of evolution, is that there needs to be evolutionary pressure for a species to adapt. There may have been hundreds of thousands of generations and plenty of mutations, but there has no been evolutionary pressure in your example for the fruit fly to change in any significant way so the mutations do not propagate throughout the population.

Yet the Peppered moth is an example of rapid change taking place because of a strong environmental pressure.

Another example, African elephants are being born without tusks due to poaching, researchers say

You are also deliberately ignoring the point I made before, that the fossil records show evolutionary change happening over a much longer time span. So of course persistent large scale changes have not been made in the short time span that you are referring to. The evidence in the fossil records shows though that evolution does happen over longer time scales. It is also inconsistent with your hypothesis.

Again it's a strawman argument from you because scientists aren't claiming that such large changes happen in such short time scales.

Of course. What is a new species of fruit fly supposed to turn into? We started with one species and now we have two. This is a whole new population, and a verified strain of the parent clade, genetically distinct from it and chemically incompatible with it, or what it's called: a new species. Speciation is determined when two members of the same genus no longer interbreed or can no longer produce viable young. The longer two groups are isolated, the more mutations build up between them and the less chance they have of producing fertile offspring. There will come a time when they can only produce infertile hybrids, and then when they can’t produce anything at all.
There are no fruit flies turning into something that isn't a fly anymore, no dogs turning into elephants, or bacteria turning into a human, and there's no mammals suddenly growing birds' wings either; nothing like that. Evolutionary theory never suggests that one "kind" of thing ever turned into another, fundamentally different "kind" of anything, not unless you ignore all the intermediate stages - which of course you do.

Macroevolution is variation between species. That means the emergence of new breeds or subspecies is microevolution, but the emergence of new species is macroevolution. The fact is that even the transition of fish to tetrapods, dinosaurs to birds, or apes to men are each just a matter of incremental, superficial changes being slowly compiled atop successive tiers of fundamental similarities. This is why birds are still dinosaurs, and humans are still apes, and both are still what it's called stegocephalian chordates.