I'm more interested in what point of evolution do you say ''there's the thing that makes ''macroevolution'' a fact.
What is critically important, in my opinion, for the person who seeks to make a determination, is for that person to see for themselves how the many disciplines related to evolutionary theory feed into and compliment each other, not just as part of collaborative efforts, but independently and across time. This is precisely why evolution is referred to as the most well-evidenced theory science has ever produced. There is literally
nothing like it.
So what you need to do is both of the following:
1) free yourself from any obligation to strictly adhere to a theology that demands an a priori rejection and
2) read relatively extensively on the topic
An excellent book to start with, in my opinion, is Jerry Coyne's
Why Evolution is True. In fact reading just this one book will equip you to engage in the sort of meaningful, progressive and ultimately productive discussion that's needed here, because among other things it provides a good overview of the content of the main categories of evidence along with plenty of nice juicy details.
The problem is, however, that I recommended this book to you 2 years ago and you show no signs of having bothered to read it (or anything like it, for that matter). If you had, you would have an understanding of the scope of the topic that would preclude you from doing silly things like asking for mere summaries in threads like this one.
I guess it must be really obvious because anyone who disagrees with it tend receives a barrage of abuse and insults for not agreeing it.
The barrage of insults is likely to continue, not so much because you reject evolution, but because you show a disdain for the reasonable requirement of learning about it. But it doesn't stop there. You go on to attempt to justify that disdain by pointing to all the ID proponents who
have done some learning, as if their adherence to a theology that demands an a priori rejection of evolution somehow magically leaves their objectivity intact.
This is, unfortunately, you in a nutshell, at least with respect to the topic at hand anyway. Nothing has changed, and it's likely that nothing will
ever change (although I certainly hope otherwise, if you are indeed interested in the truth about human origins).
