Oh good grief, you want to compare minor changes like that over 450 million years that takes an expert to identify with the emergence and death of entire species like dinosaurs and literally hundreds of others?
Then dont try to argue from a point of implied expertise.Estimates of the number of animal species that live and had lived on this earth hovers around 5 BILLION, Youve mentioned two that give you difficulty in detecting evolution, Ill give you two more , the COELOCANTH , and the METASEQUOIA glyptostroboides. (There are about under a hundred which Im sure youd have difficulty detecting ofwhat their evolution trail was composed . SO what is yer point? Really?, Lets assume that we hqve 100 species of animals who experts couldnt detect any evidence of evolutionary changes.
Percentage data points out a fact that 99.9999% of species were able to provide you visual evidence that they evolved like Darwin predicted. That fact alone doesn't give you any license from any earned expertise that evolution hadnt occurred, it just means that you dont have the necessary skills to work in the field. (Neither do I but Im closer because Ive got actual graduate training and Ive got two PhD paleontologists on staff who , when I showed them your post, merely said,
"Oh yeh? who's he think he is, Edward Drinker Cope"?? (Thats a paleo geek speak , Cope was part of an infamous overtrained but underscrupled duo of paleoscientists who fought each other for naming rights and dinosaur finds in the lqte 1800's).
In other words, we are all allowed our opinions, but please try to have yours based upon something more than a Discovery Institute tag line, or some Google searches.