Peppered moth "evolution"?

One of the lies told by evolutionists is that microevolution over time leads to macroevolution.  Berkeley.edu explains it this way:

Microevolutionary change might seem too unimportant to account for such amazing evolutionary transitions as the origin of dinosaurs or the radiation of land plants — however, it is not. Microevolution happens on a small time scale — from one generation to the next. When such small changes build up over the course of millions of years, they translate into evolution on a grand scale — in other words, macroevolution!

The peppered moth is perhaps the most famous example of “microevolution.” You may recall studying the peppered moth in highschool biology. It’s considered a textbook example of evolution via natural selection.  In case you don’t remember, let me briefly recap what has been claimed of the peppered moth.

The peppered moth is a species of moth in England that come in varieties of light and dark. Prior to the industrial revolution, the population of moths was mostly (approximately 98%) light.  They matched the lichen on trees and it was believed their light color helped camouflage them from being seen and eaten by birds.  

When the industrial revolution began, soot from the factories settled on the trees and killed the lichens.  Now, the darker variety of moth was better camouflaged against trees and the lighter moths were seen and eaten more by birds.  Over a few years, the population became mostly dark moths.

Eventually, factories became cleaner, the soot was cleaned up, and the lichen returned to the trees.  Consequently, the population of moths eventually returned to being mostly light.  

While this might fit the technical definition of evolution, I think it could be the worst example of evolution I’ve ever seen.  Let me explain.  As I’ve said, evolutionists tend to conflate micro- and macroevolution. Regarding the peppered moth Bionity.com said this:

Critics have pointed out that the "peppered moth story" showed only microevolution, rather than the important macroevolutionary trend of speciation…  Biologists agree with this point, and accept that correlation between soot on tree trunks and observed melanism in the moths is not proof of the theory of evolution as a whole. However, many do not accept the supposed distinction between "microevolution" and "macroevolution" as being part of the modern evolutionary synthesis which equates the two, instead taking the view that the mechanisms of microevolution and macroevolution are the same, the only difference being of time and scale.

You can see that the clear implication is that microevolution + time = macroevolution. The tiny changes (microevolution), like we saw in the peppered moth, over long periods of time, will lead to larger changes (macroevolution) in the species. So here's the question: It's been more than a century since the peppered moth study. What "macroevolution" has occurred? Now, I know what you're going to say. 100 years isn't enough time. But think very carefully and tell me this: what "microevolution" has occurred in the last 100 years? Don't think too hard because I'm going to tell you. None. The ratio of light/dark moths has changed back and forth to a net change of ZERO! There was not even microevolution!  The change is not accumulating nor can it. If birds continuously ate one color of moth, it will never add new colors to the population no matter how long it occurs.

Let me be clear: evolution does not occur at all - neither micro nor macro.  For evolution to occur, traits must be added to a population. For a dino to become a bird, for example, you need to add feathers. Natural selection removes traits from a population. Birds eating one shade of moth is an example of natural selection and demonstrates one way traits could be removed. Therefore, natural selection is the opposite of evolution. The “little” changes we observe in populations (the removal of traits or the rearranging of existing traits) will never amount to anything. It would be wrong to call them microevolution. 

Evolutionists give no consideration to the types of changes we observe. By their own admission, the only difference they see between micro- and macroevolution is time and scale. They believe the same mechanisms drive both and the accumulations of small changes (micro) will amount to big changes (macro) over time. That’s like believing you could turn a molehill into a mountain by continuously removing dirt; you just have to dig long enough!

The Bema Seat of Christ

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. 2 Corinthians 5:10

The Bible tells us that there will be a time when believers will stand before Christ and have their works judged.  We’re not judged for our salvation but for a reward.  1 Corinthians 3:10-15 describes this judgment as a trial by fire which will reveal the sort of works we’ve done.  Our worldly pursuits will be burned away like wood, hay, and stubble.  Only the things we did for the Kingdom will remain, revealed by the fire and made pure like gold, silver, and precious stones.  What remains after the judgment will be our reward.  It’s sobering to know that the things I do now have eternal consequences.  It would be to my shame if I stood there empty handed while other saints cast their crowns at Jesus’ feet!

The word translated in the Bible as “judgment seat” is the Greek word, bēma (βῆμα, Strong’s word 968).  A while back, I did a search to see how many times the word βήμα is used in the Bible. It is used 10 times (in various forms): 8 times in the epistles and twice in the gospels. The two times it is used in the gospels (Matthew 27:19 and John 19:13), it refers to the same event which is the judgment of Jesus before Pilate.

Here is the account from Matthew in context (Matthew 27:19-24):

When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

I thought it was interesting that Jesus Himself was once judged before the Bema seat. We know the outcome, of course; He was ultimately sentenced to be crucified. However, note carefully what Pilate said about Him. He said that Jesus was a “just person” who had done no evil. In John 19:6, Pilate is quoted as saying, “I find no fault in him at all.” The accusation board Pilate wrote to be placed over Jesus said only that He was “King of the Jews.” Was that the worst that could be said about Him? Pilate might as well have written, “Savior of the world.”

It's significant that Jesus was found to be without guilt. The Bible says that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). If Jesus had been guilty of any sin, He would have been deserving of death. If He had been deserving of death, He could not have given His life as the payment for our sins since He would have had to die for His own sins. But He was innocent. He was the lamb without blemish – the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

Before we stand before the Judgment Seat, it was necessary for Him to stand before the judgment seat. It is by His obedience that we are made righteous (Romans 5:19). Praise God!!