Small changes do not imply large changes (Talk.Origins)

Claim CB902.2:

Creationists recognize that small microevolutionary changes occur, but small changes do not imply large changes, so the theory of macroevolution is unjustified.

As worded by Talk Origins this claim is a straw man, because it does not accurately represent what Creationists say. Note that no source is given. A better way of wording it is: While this renders Talk Origins' arguments irrelevant, #2 does have issues that need to be addressed.

CreationWiki response:

There is a fourth:
 * If there are natural laws that limit change.

Statements like that show that the folks at Talk Origins are not at all objective on this issue. It clearly shows how data that disagrees with the theory can be dismissed. After all in their minds they know that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. So if evidence comes along that show it is not, then that evidence is by definition faulty regardless of its quality.

Every dating method this statement is based on is only as accurate as the theoretical system it operates in. If the theoretical system is wrong, so are the dates.

Wrong! Creationists have long held that, because of the laws of thermodynamics and the principles of information theory, the variations within Created kinds can only go downward, not upward. That is, the increased variation results in a loss of information within each group and therefore each new group is generally weaker and less fit than its ancestors.

So Creationists do have mechanisms that limit variation: these are increased entropy and increased genetic noise.