I was told:
Under most circumstances, evolution of species is a long, painstaking process. Of course, occasionally, genetic mutations in animals and plants (microbes mutate much faster) may give rise to inherently newer, related species, but generally speaking, the simplest microevolution requires decades, which is a pretty long time.
For a new species to develop, a few scenarios is possible: Cross breeding of similar breeds (Liger = Male Lion parent & Female Tiger parent), subtle, random mutations in the general population which favor natural selection, and possibly a genetic random mutation that suddenly emerges in a general population.
The truth is, evolution does not guarantee immunity from extinction. Nor does it automatically throw in raw species to make up the numbers.
And another thing. Macroevolution is not difficult to understand. Just think of it as a summation of all those minute changes in microevolution.
Cross breeding of similar breeds - I have seen the turkin and beefalope in Alabama, but that is not a proof of evolution by no means. It is a proof of science playing God by taking species and crossing them with similar species. Now a turkalope, that would be interesting to see.
possibly a genetic random mutation that suddenly emerges in a general population. - Interestingly in the world of comics mutations are seen as a superior being to human, whereas in the medical field of the real world the majority are not.
Macroevolution is not difficult to understand. Just think of it as a summation of all those minute changes in microevolution. - I do not follow the logic or reasoning behind this statement. If microevolution is the minor change within a species and macroevolution is the major change from one species to a higher species, how is it that a bunch of in species changes can equal a species jump?