It's a great video so far into it from what it is saying, I will be watching.
It's a key point to make, micro vs. macro. The thing is, while I say I believe evolution is wrong, that's not 100% accurrate. I understand that you can get genetic shifts or manipulations within a limited bounds inside of a already created genetic code, and some of these changes could have benefits.
Where I disagree is in the creation of information (new genetic code). That's where the theory of evolution fails. If we want to say, "this gene was mutated and the protein no longer was active, and this has a coincidental benefit in the environment by missing this protein"... I believe in that type of *evolution*. But since this type of evolution is the damaging of information, likely not to be restored in the future, we clearly see this is not creating new complex, finely tuned genetic code, but really just a blunt force damage to the genome, where by there is a benefit.
If my arm has gang green, and we cut it off, this is beneficial. However, it is not advancement.
The neutral theory of molecular evolution describes some of these ideas. But if we understand information theory, we realize evolution has been proven false already. Information theory contains mathematical laws, dictating Darwinian evolution is false.