Micro-mutations occurring by natural selection are massively supported by evidence and no one but the most doctrinaire young earth creationist thinks otherwise, but that's not where the fight is.
There exists no such fight, except in the fevered imaginations of science deniers. Science is unified in accepting what's quite evidently a fact, i.e., that all species are related, and descend from common ancestors. The degree of genetic and morphological dissimilarity is evidence merely of how early in time their common ancestor lived.
First your statement utterly begs the question of "how" and is completely non-responsive to my post on probabilities. Similarity in morphology or genetics does not necessarily imply common ancestry and, as we know, the fossil record is massively discordant with Neo-Darwinism. Secondly, science is not "united" on the question (the list of highly regarded intellectuals and scientists who think Neo-Darwinism cannot possibly explain the origin or development of life on this planet is long and impressive) , but even if it were, that fact would be irrelevant because scientific truth his not decided by committee, but by evidence. As Einstein famously remarked when Hitler trotted out his finest physicists to denounced Einstein's theories as false, "it only takes one to prove me wrong." The very fact that you have to employ the logical fallacy of "appeal to consensus" shows that you can't respond on the merits. You remind me of apologists for global warming who insist on the same logical fallacy (scientific consensus). In anv event, so called "science" (consensus opinion) has been spectacularly wrong in the past, as it is wrong right now on global warming, wouldn't you agree?
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/nhqZTmxJ/Screen-Shot-2020-11-08-at-5-01-55-PM.png)
