You lose me where your statement insinuates that generational mutation and selection AREN'T evolutionary processes. Yeah I would say the moths are only experiences a small "step-change" but thats because thats what evolution is... small step changes that accumulate eventually to cause SPECIATION which is an event within the theory of evolution that causes new species to arise.

Just because a new species isn't being born, doesn't mean there isn't evolution in each step. In the example of the back moths; let's say now the next several generations are born black. -JUST AN EXAMPLE- but let's say their black color made them unable to mate back with the white population, and their pigment also lead to an increased expression of dwarfism which comes with the black pigment but isn't being killed off because the black pigment is also advantagous now.

If the dwarf, black colored moth and a regular white moth were in the same tank, they would no longer mate and this would be a case of SPECIATION by the phylogenetic or morphological classification of species. This is undeniably a viable example of evolution.

Changing the "kind" of thing it is, isn't evolution, that's barely even an accurate definition of speciation, as many very different species still look very similar on the outside, as is with MANY birds.

"So when you get lungs, exoskeletons, and stomachs from... bla bla bla" U ever been taught evolutionary biology in a classroom? Cause is sure sounds like ur spewing a lot of "scientific" knowledge about evolutionary definitions which aren't accurate to anything spoken by any traditional evolutionary advocate since before Darwin.