Logical fallacies 2

Evolutionists fail to see the logical flaw associated with extending what applies only in a  limited sense to everything or in  a more extended way.
How do they end up doing that?
In evolution there are two categories , microevolution and macroevlution.
Microevolution is nothing but variations which occur within a genus, forming new species.This is quite widely obsevable in nature  and testable in the lab.But this happens only in a limited way. These variations do not exceed certain limits.For example dogs after much cross breeding will not change their kind.They still remain dogs but a new breed of dog.So when evolutions take this as proof for macroevolution ,they are extending what is seen into what is not seen in nature.I.E the evolution of one kind from another.Best example evolution of  birds from reptiles.Evolution of birds from reptiles is not seen in nature, is not testable in the laboratory and is a result of reading evolution into between the two kinds of  organism.
This logical fallacy is called Fallacy of extension.The  above is  an example.